Virtue Ethics Vs Utilitarianism

1180 Words3 Pages

1. Utilitarianism was described by J. Bentham as the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Utilitarianism is a holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes the amount of happiness. It is therefore a form of consequentialism, which means that the moral value of an action is determined only by its outcome, so one can only weigh the morality of an action after thinking about all its potential consequences. Utilitarianism focuses more on the happiness of the greatest number whereas Aristotle focuses more on the happiness of the individual person Virtue ethics developed by Aristotle which is a moral theory that focuses on the development of virtuous character. In virtue ethics, character is the key to the moral life, for it is from a virtuous character that moral conduct and values naturally arise. Aristotle believes that the highest goal of humanity is the good life or Eudaimonia which means happiness and human flourishing. Developing virtues is the way to achieve a rich and satisfying life. According to him, virtues make …show more content…

In the Renada case, Kantian would not donate the second kidney. Because it could lead danger in David’ life, so it violates the donor’s duty of self-preservation. Kantian believes that the motive is more important than the result which means doing the right thing for the right reason. David want donate kidney because of he wants to save his daughter. If his daughter was not sick, he would not donate kidney. Principle based ethics such as Kantian ethics tells us what we should to do but, virtue ethics tells us qualities of a good person. If David want to donate his second kidney to his daughter, he can. He aware that he could dangerous after transplant, but he loves his daughter, and he want to be a good dad. He has virtues such as love, caring, and courage. Virtue ethics provides more options to be morally good person to

Open Document