The question here arises, why did we have to return to ancient philosophy of virtue ethics? But interestingly while a great deal of credit is given to Aristotle and Plato, the modern moral philosophers such as Anscombe, Foot, Murdoch, Slote had mentioned in very precise terms the problems they found in Aristotelian ethics. They must have absorbed the writings of ancient philosophers since a lot is said about the moral philosophies of these great thinkers in books of modern philosophers, still the father of modern moral philosopher was not blind to the problems of following ancient terms and values. In his famous paper on the subject, Anscombe wrote:
Anyone who has read Aristotle Ethics and has also read modern moral philosophy must have been struck by the great contrasts between them. The concepts which are prominent among the moderns seem to be lacking, or at any rate buried or far in the background, in Aristotle. Most noticeably, the term 'moral' itself, which we have by direct inheritance from Aristotle, just doesn't seem to fit, in its modern sense, into an account of Aristotelian ethics. (p. 26)
Modern moral philosophy was thus more concerned with the discovery of a better system of viewing and judging ethics than the ones that had been prevalent at the time. Anscombe's philosophy doesn't try to expound a theory....
He simply urges for a system that would allow human beings the benefit of doubt i.e. instead of judging their behavior according to strict rules of deontology or utilitarianism; there would be a better way of determining ethical value of a person's actions and beliefs. The main problem with modern moral philosophy, we could say, is that it doesn't define its boundaries in definitive terms. This is clear from Anscombe's concluding comments: "It is left to modern moral philosophy -- the moral philosophy of all the well-known English ethicists since Sidgwick -- to construct systems according to which the man who says 'We need such-and-such, and will only get it this way' may be a virtuous character: that is to say, it is left open to debate whether such a procedure as the judicial punishment of the innocent may not in some circumstances be the 'right' one to adopt..." (p. 44)
Virtue ethics is thus an alternative to deontology and utilitarianism. Its main problem is its lack of boundaries but its positive elements includes its desire to seek alternative and create a better system of judging ethical value of an action or virtuousness of a person.
References
GEM Anscombe. "Modern Moral Philosophy" reprinted in Virtue Ethics. Roger Crisp, Michael Slote edition. (1997) Oxford University Press- Oxford Publication.
