What you are going to do.
Exercise i: does character exist?
The following is quoted from gilbert harmon’s article, “the nonexistence of character traits.”
Virtue ethicists do not and need not argue that most people are indeed virtuous or could in principle become virtuous' (Athanassoulis, 1999). But if we know that there is no such thing as a character trait and we know that virtue would require having character traits, how can we aim at becoming a virtuous agent? If there are no character traits, there is nothing one can do to acquire character traits that are more like those possessed by a virtuous agent.
Examine each of the premises set forth in this argument.
- Is it the case that there is no such thing as a character trait? (For example, do the Milgram experiments show that character traits displayed in one situation disappear when one enters into a different situation? Does the fact that a significant minority of subjects refused to continue in the experiment provide evidence that it is possible to develop robust character traits or is this just a matter of luck?)
- Does virtue ethics rest on the assumption that there are robust, trans-situational character traits? (Do robust character traits have a basis in nature? Can these be developed by, say, practicing to the point of becoming “second nature?”)
- In other words, does the inconsistency of action across situations displayed in the Milgram experiments undermine the claim that virtue ethics is possible?
Exercise ii: must george sacrifice his integrity to meet his family’s needs?
George is a chemist. He recently received a Ph.D. in this area and demonstrated considerable skill and knowledge in a highly specialized and sought after area of this discipline. But George is also unemployed. His wife has had to quit school and work as a waitress. They have two children and, even though George shares care-giving and domestic duties with his wife, it would be better if his wife could quit her job, go back to school, and have more time to be with her children. Finally, George is a pacifist. Since his expertise in Chemistry has military applications (specifically in the development of weapons in chemical warfare), it is possible for George to find work but only in positions that go against his pacifist beliefs. George’s friend, Antonio, informs him of a job possibility with Mega Weapons, a company whose revenues come primarily from government military defense projects. Antonio can get George an interview with Mega Weapons, and, given the scarcity of people with George’s expertise, this interview will probably result in a well-paying job. George however expresses concern with taking on such a job given that it would go against his pacifist beliefs. George is highly committed as a pacifist; these beliefs have been integrated into his core self system.
Questions
- Should George set aside his pacifist beliefs in order to carry out his family responsibilities?
- Under what conditions would setting aside his pacifist beliefs undermine George’s integrity?
- By sticking to his pacifist beliefs and refusing to pursue this job opportunity, is George falling into the vice of excess, fanaticism and unreasonableness?
- If George sets aside his pacifism and takes a job with Mega Weapons, does he fall into the vice of defect, namely, does he become a hypocrite or a moral chameleon?
