Socrates said that "he is now better off with respect to the whole thing which he did not know. Once he has explained this he can inquire into what virtue is and remember the answer.
In his "Practical Wisdom: There are, of course, some limitations; most prominently, while there are suggestive and interesting contributions to understanding the connections between reasons and virtues, the chapters vary significantly in the depth of their engagement with such issues.
As Braun notes, modesty seems to involve an unwillingness to treat oneself as more worthy than others; the egalitarian account captures this unwillingness, and the embrace of social equality could explain why modesty is a moral virtue. If not, why not? A disposition has to be learned in response to a situation.
Aristotle said that all people are composed of a combination of vice bad character traits and virtue good character traits. And Audi addresses the nature and place of role-modeling in the development of the virtues.
After reading Nicomachean Ethics I thought more about the topic and considered many examples of when "bad" behaviors are the right thing to do or the only choice. These criteria vary quite significantly -- for example, whether an action is honest depends solely on the aim of the action, whereas whether an action is kind depends on its aim, but also its motive, and the manner in which it is performed.
He agrees to the process, dialectic, that Socrates uses to explain how a question may be asked and answered because the doctrine shows that one can only obtain the knowledge through recollection. I personally believe that there are actions that in most cases are wrong. The self-defense example is one of these; another classic example would be a mother stealing Essays on virtue to feed her family.
I cannot do justice here to the full range of issues addressed by Audi in this paper; there is a tremendous amount of substance and insightful reflection concerning the virtues and their development.
After proving recollection to Meno Socrates says this: In the later parts of his paper Cullity develops a unique taxonomy of the virtues. Birondo argues for an internalist account of eudaimonia, where the nature of eudaimonia is determined by the virtuous, but where ordinary folk can still understand this conception.
Aristotle argued that since different people may act differently in the same situation there are no inherently bad actions.
A highly demanding answer would hold that all such remote circumstances are relevant -- if a person would act poorly under extreme conditions, then we should not attribute courage or other relevant virtues to her. An argument against the thesis is that some actions are morally wrong on every level.
In the first part of the chapter Cullity provides criteria for the application of various aretaic terms to traits and dispositions, but also to actions and other entities. Socrates asks the slave boy questions about a part of geometry which the slave boy had not learnt before.
Part II, "Reasons and Virtues in Development", is the most unified section of the volume, consisting of three chapters addressing how non-virtuous agents can develop the virtues.
Tsu argues that McDowell focuses on the first two conceptions, but that the absolute and pro tanto conceptions would allow for the codifiability of the reasons of virtue, and are in fact more attractive than the rival conceptions.
While there are few connections linking them, each chapter is strong and raises interesting issues in its own right. Cullity proposes a corresponding threefold set of categories of virtue: Even if someone has a thought or feelings about driving drunk, they cannot be held accountable for the thought and feelings if they do not act on them.
Since we are all capable of basically the same things, but we do not all fulfill these capacities we cannot be held accountable for them.
He uses this concept to explain the thesis: Birondo focuses his attention on a recent version of the worry presented by Jesse Prinz.
For example we learn to wear certain styles of clothing. Overall, this is a strong collection of insightful and often thought-provoking papers.
Similarly, in a given remote situation, the more likely an agent is to act well compared to a second agent, the more justified we are in attributing the relevant virtue to her. Arguments can be made both for and against this thesis.
In replying to Prinz, Birondo draws stark attention to the ways in which critics of virtue ethics often ignore relevant literature and responses by virtue ethicists. For example, Christianity says that it is wrong for a person to kill another person. Finally, according to the absolute conception, virtuous agents act in accordance with a or a set of absolute, exceptionless moral principle s ; this need not involve mechanical rule-following -- we can demonstrate judgment in applying the principle s.
She agrees with Audi that we cannot directly will ourselves to act or not on a given reason or set of reasons. Audi first explores the nature of role-modeling of both moral and intellectual virtues, drawing attention to often-overlooked issues e.
Note on the Text: Socrates has a process by which he attempts to reach knowledge. The action of drunk driving is important, but not because it is inherently wrong.
And how will you inquire into a thing, Socrates, when you are wholly ignorant of what it is? So it is right to try boldly to inquire into and recollect what you do not happen to know at present?- The Virtue of Bravery In this essay I will be describing the virtue of bravery.
I will first define what Aristotle thinks virtue is, explain the virtue of bravery, and then finally reflect this virtue on my personal experience in the Shaw neighborhood.
Included: philosophy essay content. Preview text: The Socratic doctrine of recollection is an attempt to explain how dialectic (the Socratic method of doing philosophy) is possible - to explain how the question.
The Virtue of Bravery In this essay I will be describing the virtue of bravery. I will first define what Aristotle thinks virtue is, explain the virtue of bravery, and then finally reflect this virtue on my personal experience in the Shaw neighborhood.
A virtue can be defined as many things. A virtue is simply the foundation of humanity. In other words a virtue is a standard by which we humans judge and standardize our behaviors and character based on moral excellence.
Virtue Ethics is a moral philosophy commonly attributed to Plato and Aristotle. The meaning of the word "virtue" for both was that of excellence. Although there are differences in their individual schools of thought, their outlook on morality is more or less the same.
According to the editors, Noell Birondo and S. Stewart Braun, The main aims of this book are to foster a greater appreciation for the multiplicity of reasons surrounding the concept of the virtues and to shed light on what is presumably the paradigm case, of an individual agent responding to an array of potential reasons, often in diverse circumstances and contexts.Download