To What Extent Do Modern Versions of Virtue Ethics Address

To what extent do groundbreaking versions of right ethical motive holler the weaknesses of Aristotles teachings on uprightness? Aristotles idea of uprightness moral philosophy was influenced by his belief that any things and all humans refurbishment a purpose (a telos). For him a complete explanation of something has to include its lowest cause or purpose which essentially is to realise its potential. Virtue morals itself is concerned with the char wagereristics of a person rather than how a person behaves and it is this he outlined in his book Nicomachean Ethics. A virtue atomic number 18 qualities that caterpillar track to a good life sentence e. . resolution and honesty. Aristotle explains for a person to pad these qualities into their own lives is to maximise their potential to achieve a happy life and he goes on to explain Eudaimonia as organism a quality of this happiness. However Aristotle then explains that a person should not act cleanly just to achieve a pa rticular end because he studys this to be a subordinate aim. A person that acts in a way to achieve goodness Aristotle explains is a superior aim and it is these wad that act good because it is the right way to act not because they ought to.Following on from this Aristotle goes on to explain the key to goodness and virtue is to follow the gold mean. This is when as a person we act between ii extreme vices for example the midpoint between shamelessness and shyness is modesty, this consequently is the golden mean. Aristotle also distinguished between two types of virtue, moral virtues and talented virtues. The first being those cultivated through habit whilst intellectual virtues be those cultivated through instruction. In the later twentieth century Virtue Ethics suffered a revival.It was questioned whether Aristotles teachings on Virtue Ethics had any(prenominal) weaknesses and some modern perspectives on Virtue Theory mickle be seen to highlight these flaws. Although not t o a great extent, I do believe some modern versions of Virtue Ethics address the weaknesses of Aristotles teachings and my cerebration is shared by many a(prenominal) scholars who have criticised Aristotles Virtue Ethics for being also relative, vague and self-centred. Elizabeth Anscombe believed that ethical codes laying tautness on moral absolute laws are overaged in a social club where effectively a belief in God has been tumble-down by the majority.She believed that we need to return to a morality which is found on human flourishing. However Anscombe did believe a return to achieving Eudaimonia was indispensable and working from the basis of Aristotles work she believed morality is best based on a person (agent) rather than an act or outcome. likewise Philippa Foot implored that although virtues cannot guarantee happiness, they can go some way to achieving it and she too uses Aristotles root but updates them accordingly.She explains that virtues can single be virtuous when apply in the correct way she used the example of courage when applied to somebody robbing a bank, in this instance courage is indeed not a virtue and cannot be seen as virtuous. Alasdair MacIntyre encourages a return to the basis of Aristotles understanding of virtue and encourages the development of virtues that are applicable to contemporary cadences. He believed when compared to other ethical theories Virtue Ethics are more realistic and applicable to peoples everyday situations.I would agree with MacIntyre here that a virtue-approach is more suitable in our order of magnitude. Naturalistic theories of ethics are time consuming and overly complexed and therefrom difficult to apply, Virtue Ethics yet is not. For MacIntyre morality should be focused on developing your telos, this echoing Aristotles teachings. When referring back to the question, to what extent do modern versions of virtue ethics address the weakness of Aristotles teachings, Macintyres work can be used t o show that Modern versions of virtue ethics can do the need opposite.Aristotles teachings are seen throughout Macintyres work so how therefore can Aristotles work be criticized for having weaknesses? However not all modern philosophers use Aristotles work in their own and many would argue against my view that it is without weakness. J. L Mackie, Louden and Sidgewick have criticized Aristotles teachings for being too vague for any application and Sidgewick went on to say it only indicates the whereabouts of a virtue. The belief that is doesnt provide accurate guidance can also be seen in Rosalind Hursthouses work.She believes Aristotles work on Virtue Ethics doesnt explain how a person would or should act but only how a virtuous person would gauge about the dilemma. However she like Foot and Anscombe is a supporter of Aristotles approach to morality utilise his work but adapting it to suit a modern society. When looking at Aristotles teachings, they can be seen as very cultural d ependent. The change in culture in our society today can be seen as a barrier for bring back this ethical theory. During the time of Aristotle communities were consistent in what they believed and this made virtues applicable to all.However in relation to our own communities today is there this consistency? In my flavour I do not believe so. For this reason I would argue that Aristotles idea of Eudaimonia in todays society would be interpreted differently by many and one virtue for somebody may be a vice for another. From modern scholars such(prenominal) as Anscombe, Foot and MacIntyre we can see that Aristotles ideas are gloss over prevalent in their own and it is for this reason that I disagree modern versions of virtue ethics addresses the weaknesses of Aristotles teachings to a large extent.Whilst using his roots but changing it to suit a modern society may be seen ,by some, to be a weakness in my opinion this is a strength. Aristotles teachings have stood the test of time a nd are still predominantly used in this century with only a few suppress changes. The counter argument however would be that Aristotles teachings are outdated for the community we live in flat. The difference in community now compared with that of Aristotles provide a weakness in his theory and I understand that to a small extent weaknesses can be found, using modern versions of Virtue Ethics, in Aristotles teachings.