Is Virtue Theory Applicable

Is Virtue Theory Applicable?: How One Fails to Answer This Question

For many of years, thousands of philosophers have set out to try to answer one question: what makes an individual moral? Whether it be through certain theories that strive to explain what that person looks like or moral obligations that determine one’s character, they are all trying to answer the same question. As we investigate the overarching topic of ethics, one could find it hard for any one theory or moral code to perfectly define what that person looks like. With that said, during Rosalind Hursthouse’s Virtue Theory and Abortion, she has failed in appropriately answering the main objections of virtue theory, thus, leaving the theory open for further interpretation. Throughout

“We do not know which character traits are the virtues, or that this is open to much dispute, or particularly subject to the threat of moral scepticism or ‘pluralism’ or cultural relativism” (Hursthouse 587). If you take a look at what someone asks of a moral person through virtue theory, it leaves a lot of room for debate, especially across different cultures, because there are no set principles to determine a moral person. Hursthouse certainly acknowledges this fact. However, she doesn’t accomplish her initial objective of attempting to explain why virtue theory is still applicable. She closes her argument with this statement; “Each theory has to stick out its neck and say, in some cases, ‘This person/these people/other cultures are (or would be) in error,’ and find some grounds for saying this,” (Hursthouse 587). It is easy to understand certain virtues aren’t cross-cultural, thus, making it difficult to identify a certain set of virtues that makes one moral. However, to use the argument that something does not fit our theory, therefore, we need an overarching statement to cover all loopholes is miniscule. Virtue theory as a whole leaves many ethical situations up in the air, because it does not provide us with a specific set of virtues to follow. Equally, Hursthouse does the same thing. If you are going to provide an argument against your belief you

She claims virtue theory does, to some extent, answer the question of, “What sort of person should I be?” (Hursthouse 586). This is done by coming up with rules or principles, which are contrary to the popular belief that virtue theory does not do this (Hursthouse 586). Interestingly enough, if you do an internet search on virtue theory, you will find that most explain it opposite of Hursthouse. Nonetheless, as part of her argument she states, “Every virtue generates a positive instruction (act justly, kindly, courageously, honestly, etc.) and every vice a prohibition (do not act unjustly, cruelly, like a coward, dishonestly, etc.)” (Hursthouse 586). The example Hursthouse uses in her argument is convenient for what she is trying to say, because it puts the subject in a vulnerable state due to the circumstances. Therefore, saying that you want an abortion could be considered by most as a just action, due to what had happened. Using Hursthouse’s argument let’s look at another ethical scenario. Early on, in a 1958 book by Chinua Achebe, the main character, Okonkwo, provides a home for a child named Ikemefuna. For Okonkwo, Ikemefuna grows to be like a son to him. However, Okonkwo is informed by other tribe members that they must kill Ikemefuna, due to his ties to their rival tribe. But, he is not to have a hand in the killing of his adopted son. As tribal members