Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
As you know, deontology is the study of morality, which is guided by compliance or non-compliance with certain rules (“due”) when evaluating an action. At the same time, consequentialism relies on the result of an action as the main criterion for evaluation.
Virtue ethics goes beyond the classical dichotomous division of ethics mentioned above. According to this trend, which is often accused of subjectivism and insufficient theoretical justification, an individual tends to act in one way or another not because of his deontological-consequential beliefs, but because of the presence or absence of certain “virtues” as properties/parts of his character. In order not to speculate on the insufficiently defined and subjective concept of “virtue” (which can be defined as a specific moral property of a person's character), I suggest replacing this word with the definition of “value”. Value – a strong idea of a personal or group ultimate goal (s) of existence and how to achieve them. More information about the theory of values can be found in the research of the American-Polish psychologist Milton Rokich.
Having defined the “ethics of virtue” as the “ethics of values”, it remains to say that, according to it, the individual does not proceed from consequential or deontological attitudes regarding a particular problem. A solves it by following its values, using both the tools of contract (deontology) and considering the consequences of its actions (consequentialism).