Philosophy? Ethics

PHlLOSOPHYANDETHlCS

How does Kant view virtue

——Law and virtue: virtue ethics from a critical perspective

Yu Le

1. The propositions and characteristics of virtue ethics

Virtue (virtue) ①. An ancient concept of evoking good impressions. There is a subtle but clearly discernible difference with concepts such as virtue and morality: virtue refers to behaviors that go beyond the general moral performance of obligations, such as paying debts is just an obligation, and repaying debts is a waste of money. Or giving a selfless gift without the obligation to give is a virtue worthy of praise; generally keeping a promise is an obligation, but if your life is threatened and you give up the promise, you can be forgiven, and still keeping the promise is a virtue. Therefore, virtue is beyond the moral performance of obligations. It is not performed for some objective obligations and responsibilities, but out of the nobility of the actor.

Nature: He behaves this way not because he "should", but because he "should", out of inner qualities rather than objective requirements. Therefore, there is an important difference from general moral practice (fulfillment of obligations). It can even be considered that virtue is defined as "supererogation"⑦, that is, "additional merit", which is different from Kant's concept of virtue (Tugend) associated with laws and obligations, as transcendence

Work and contribution beyond duties as additional duties

In virtue ethics represented by Aristotle, it is virtue (virtue), not duty. (obligation) and rules occupy the core position of moral discourse. Moral judgment is not an "obligation-centered judgment", but a "quality-centered judgment". ④The important thing is not the rules of behavior. , but the intrinsic character of the actor. Aristotle understands good (eudaimonia) as "the realization of activities in accordance with morality", and people will naturally experience "happiness" (joy) and "goodness" in practice. " can be understood as the unity of virtue and happiness, the goal pursued by human nature. He emphasized the element of happiness in "realization activities": people experience happiness in virtuous behavior, and happiness and virtue are unified . It means that people are able and even very willing to realize the purpose recognized and chosen by their "nusi", and their behavior even far exceeds the "should" standard, reflecting nobility and greatness

Or kindness: "A just man often does things for the benefit of his friends or his country, even at the expense of his own life if necessary. He can give up his money, honor, and things that people have worked hard to obtain, and keep nobility (nobility) only for himself." ④ These qualities are not requirements of rules or obligations, but transcend the trivial mediocrity of daily life and put people

However, Aristotle continued: "Such people are certainly good people, because they choose for themselves first of all nobility. Therefore, in all things worthy of praise, good men give themselves nobility (nobility). So, as mentioned above. We should be self-lovers in this sense, not the kind of self-lovers that most people are. "One is "total

Wanfang Data

New Oriental 2009.10th

Doing things that make you noble (noble) rather than other things "The self-love person, one is the self-love person who "satisfies his own desires, in short, satisfies his feelings or the logoless part of his soul". The former "will not be condemned as self-love by anyone.

or accuse him," who, however, "justly

received.

"⑤

The hidden core of virtue ethics emerges: out of the "self-love" of one's noble qualities and the happiness brought by achieving noble qualities

An act of "self-love" not out of obligation or responsibility, but for the sake of fulfilling oneself

The virtues specifically discussed by Aristotle include: courage, temperance, generosity, generosity, nobility of soul, Good temper or gentleness

Elegance, gregariousness, wit, etc., "Among these virtues, the nobility of the soul is partly related to how to treat people at the bottom of society, generosity and generosity

degree involves attitude towards one's own property. Three of the other virtues are related to the so-called grace in upper class society"⑥; these virtues are obviously closely related to an unequal social hierarchy, and in an era when everyone is equal, deliberately treating friends or others Generosity,

magnanimity, is suspected of putting oneself in a higher position than the other party. Aris

Dodd is discussing the virtue of "magnificence". At this time, the limitations of his thoughts are more clearly shown, "It is reasonable for a magnanimous person to despise others (his judgment is true)... He is willing to do good things to others, but is ashamed to do so." Receive benefits from others. Because giving benefits to others makes him superior to others, and receiving benefits from others makes others superior to him. X. -f He is willing

to repay more for the benefits he received, because this not only repays the person who gave him the benefits

, but also makes that person receive the benefits from him in turn. . A generous person always

remembers the benefits he has given to others, but does not remember the benefits he received from others (because

the recipient is the person who is surpassed by the benefactor, and A magnanimous person wants to be a person who is better than others). ⑦ These conclusions that surprise modern people are Aristotle’s true thoughts: in his view, a person with high virtue is a person with extreme self-love ( For those who love themselves) and strive to surpass others, everything they do comes from their superior soul, showing their proud soul and great heart (magnifi-cence), making all others dwarfed by comparison. Even ashamed of oneself.

2. The Dilemma of Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics emerged from traditional societies where social roles are relatively fixed (hierarchy) and social life is relatively simple and stagnant. Therefore, it brings

p>

There are insurmountable limitations. In Aristotle's theory as a representative form, the teleology related to human nature is based on metaphysics

and later biology. MacIntyre, who advocates the revival of virtue ethics, has to admit this: "If If we reject this biology—and we must reject it—how else can we defend this teleology? ”＠

The basis of Aristotle’s virtue theory is the theory of human function and purpose. He believes that human beings should achieve certain functions in harmony with other animals and plants

Different functions (although these functions of animals and plants are also found in humans), and this function that distinguishes humans from animals and plants is reason (logic). Aristotle said: "Life activities are also owned by plants, and what we are exploring are the special activities of humans. ”

It is “the practical life of the part that has logos (the logos of this part has two meanings: first, in the sense that it obeys logos

The other is in the sense of possessing and using Nus)" Therefore, "The good of man is the realization of the moral nature of the soul, if there is more than one. Virtue is the realization activity that is consistent with the best and most perfect virtue

.

”⑨

Although Aristotle regards reason (possessing or obeying logos) as the unique function of human beings, he clearly takes “happiness” as its purpose and happiness

Bliss is the highest good. "Happiness is perfect and self-sufficient. It is the purpose of all activities." This falls into the target of Kant's criticism, although

However, Aristotle's concept of "happiness (eudaimonia)" has a very rich connotation, "because in fact we determine happiness as living well and doing well"@, that is, the soul carries out realization activities in a virtuous way , however, Aristotle, as Kant criticized, brought in perceptual things

as the basis for determining the will, making the theory of virtue (Tugendlehre)

supposed to teach The doctrine of "how we should deserve happiness" has transformed into the theory of eudaimonia (Gltick—seligkeitslehre) of "how we can make ourselves happy", as Kant criticized, "We must never

treat ethics itself as a doctrine of happiness, that is, as some kind of guide to sharing happiness"@; This criticism is appropriate for Aristotle's theory, although his The concept of happiness contains rational factors.

Aristotle's theory of human function and purpose gave a deep imprint on virtue ethics and was inseparable from the social hierarchy at that time. The connection has insurmountable historical limitations. In Greek, the word virtue is "arete", which means "the excellence and excellence of a thing," and by extension, "the excellence of a person." and virtue", "According to Plato and Aristotle, virtue is related to the functioning of each individual (ac—

cording

to

PlatoandAristotle , virtualisconnectedwith

performing

a

function)"o. From this explanation, the Greek concept of virtue

has a key connection with fulfilling one's duties in the hierarchy and social division of labor, such as the virtues discussed by Aristotle (wisdom, justice, courage

Dare), a virtue needed by the dominant Greeks to perform their duties, and he rarely talked about "humility." Because it is a virtue that originates from the lower classes (Christianity that originated among the lower classes).

In a society where status and distribution are hereditary, people have a clear awareness of their

roles and behaviors. Rulers should be wise and

just, warriors should be brave, and the ruled should be temperate. These consciousnesses begin to form from childhood. People do not ask abstractly: "How should I behave", but concretely Questions like "How should a person of my status behave?" Moral issues are issues of "duty". There are only good rulers, good warriors, and good citizens, and there is no abstract sense. Good people. Aristotle also understood this, "For a flute player, a carpenter

or any craftsman, in short, x.-J-anyone who has some activity or practice In other words, their goodness or excellence lies in the perfection of that activity

Likewise, if a person has an activity, his goodness also lies in the perfection of this activity."@However, Aristotle's " "Human activity", although

"a practical life with a logos part", the goal is directed to "happiness": a good person. It is a person who obtains happiness in a virtuous way. Therefore, he is not so abstract as to ask a question that excludes any material purpose as the basis of will: "How should I behave?" This question goes far beyond questions based on specific identities and duties

In some contemporary efforts to revive virtue ethics thought, such as Mack

Although Gentile is well aware of the teleology and metaphysics of biology as Aristotle

The foundation of Dodd's theory of virtue has collapsed, and he still attempts to demonstrate the necessity of virtue by using the concept of "community" and "human vulnerability and dependence". Sex and possibility. but. An attempt to place morality above some set purpose, such as some basis for good in the collective life, or to place morality above a certain need (out of dependence). (sexual need for help), it must move towards the heteronomy of will (morality). As Kant said, heteronomous morality is essentially non-moral. In the modern society that has experienced the Enlightenment. ***It is questionable whether consubstantial identification can provide guidance for individual behavior

. Even if it is possible, in a modern society where the differences and changes within the community are becoming increasingly rich and where different cultures coexist, people will definitely be at a loss when faced with different community values. There is no way to resolve the contradictions and conflicts between *** comrades. No matter what kind of homophobia one identifies with, the question will still be: "No matter who I

am. What are the norms I should follow to achieve whatever I want?"

3. Critical Investigation: Virtue in the Perspective of Law

The theory of virtue arouses people's beautiful emotions and imagination. The promise that virtuous behavior will bring noble happiness is the highest happiness a person can achieve. Aristotle said that the happiness "according to the best virtue", that is, the virtue of reason (nus), is the "contemplative life", which only a few can achieve because it is demigod. "Consistent with

Wanfang Data

Philosophy? Ethics

PHILOSOPHYANDETHlCS

A life of other virtues is only the second best", That is, a life that is in line with "moral virtue"

is "completely human"＠, thereby promoting people to behave in line with

the laws of virtue. In fact, although Aristotle did not explicitly realize and clarify the problem of virtue dynamics, he used happiness as the reward of virtue in an attempt to solve this problem.

Kant made a profound criticism of the idea of ??persuading people to practice virtue based on the pleasure brought by virtuous activities. Kant refuted the view that the pleasure brought by certain activities is "subordinate to the higher faculty of desire" and believed that "the key to the problem is not where the representation of this pleasant x.-J-image comes from, but only that it to what extent it makes people happy", because "the pleasant emotion (pleasure, and the happiness one expects from that which drives the activity of creating objects) is of the same type, by which they alone form the basis of determination of the will. ". Therefore, Kant believes: "A rational being's awareness of the joy of life that constantly accompanies his entire existence is happiness, and the principle that makes happiness the highest basis for arbitrariness is The Principle of Self-Love”o. so. Kant thoroughly criticized Aristotle's theory of virtue which regarded "happiness" as the purpose (and motivation) and used happiness as a reward to persuade people to practice it. Requirements in which virtue ceases to be an end and becomes a means.

The theory of virtue emphasizes the psychological state of an individual when performing virtuous behavior:

Doing something "happily" and feeling "satisfied and happy" for it. The point of view x. -J" People's moral psychology has been carefully observed, but it has not been clarified why people feel "satisfied and happy" when they practice virtue.

Kant analyzed this phenomenon of moral psychology in depth,

"Although equally untrue, but more subtle, are the excuses of those who postulate a special moral sense. It is said that it is this moral sense, not reason, that determines the moral law. According to the moral sense, the consciousness of virtue is directly connected with satisfaction and happiness, while the consciousness of sin is

and the restlessness of the soul. combined with pain, so that they finally put everything on the demand for their own happiness." Therefore, this is an "illusion": "In order to show a guilty person as being aware of his sin, who are tormented by inner insecurity, they must

have previously shown him to be at least to some extent morally good on the basis of the most important foundations of his character, as well as to be conscious of the duty of People who feel happy in their actions have already shown themselves to be virtuous."@

Therefore, in Kant's view. The two emotions of "satisfaction and happiness" and "uneasiness and pain" are not the basis for determining will in moral activities. On the contrary, they are determined by moral laws. Only people who have a certain understanding of moral laws can produce these two emotions. "So after all, the concepts of morality and obligation must precede all considerations of this satisfaction

Xin Dongfang 2009.10 Wan

and cannot be derived from this satisfaction at all. derived from it”@. Therefore, instead of being the basis for determination of will, they are only the result of volitional behavior. They may have an impact on people's will, but they can still only be wills that already have an understanding of morality and obligations.

Not the opposite.

Virtue ethics emphasizes the willingness and pleasure when practicing virtue, and uses this as a basis to accuse Kant of advocating "duty for duty's sake" behavior that actually contains resistance to obligation in the heart. The above is "hypocrisy" against one's will. This is based on a misinterpretation of the concept of "hypocrisy." Kant has a clear definition of the concept of "hypocrisy (Gleisnerei)": "So

since we do it for the sake of the moral law. And in order to make the moral law gain

control over the will The influence must not seek any other motives that may lack moral law, because this will lead to all unsustainable

outright hypocrisy", "hypocrisy" does not mean lack of willingness and

Pleasure, but the determination of the will of its actions is based on whether "other possibilities

may lack the motivation of the moral law." If the basis for determining the will of behavior is the moral law, then even though people as perceptual beings still have some inner resistance when they act in accordance with the moral law, they still It's not "hypocrisy

good". On the contrary, virtue ethics persuades people to do good deeds based on pleasure and the "nobility" of the actor's own achievement. Its purpose is not moral, but "in addition to the moral law, other motives (as interests) are allowed to work together." "@, as Kant said, it is "unlasting

complete hypocrisy."

Models who practice virtue are either of noble birth, excellent endowment, superior ability, and noble character. They embody the height of virtue that human beings can achieve, and bring great inspiration and expectations to ordinary people. On the one hand, because of their character and upbringing or other special reasons, they do have a more kind will, have a high tendency to obey the law (although they are not necessarily clearly aware of it), and pay attention to their own.

The emotional motivation of vital interests seems trivial for this; on the other hand.

In a hierarchical society that promotes virtue, the interests of these people in a superior position have been protected by the system, and they do not need to worry too much about it, in their minds. Their nobility and superiority have been destined, such as what Aristotle calls "magnificence". It is their "duty" to show superiority and nobility. ”, they must fulfill.

Therefore, when they show virtue to people of lower social status, just as Kant said, "Many people may feel happy by doing good to others." , but do not want to be bound by obligations to others; if a person comes to them obediently, they may do anything for him

But they do not want to be bound by the rights of others, but Treat others merely as

objects of your own magnanimity.” In such an unequal personality relationship, virtue is just a way for the noble party to achieve and show himself.

Wanfang Data

The fundamental relationship between the personalities is According to the modern moral point of view, it is immoral. To show generosity and courtesy to those who think they are lower than themselves in social status or even in terms of personal value is just to return to these people what belongs to these lower status people, just like taking away Landlords with high land rents occasionally opened warehouses "generously" to provide relief to their tenants. Kant pointedly pointed out: "When general injustice is firmly maintained, the natural rights of the inferiors cease; they become mere debtors, and the superiors owe them nothing, so they become noble masters." ". Therefore,

"A society based on benevolent good deeds, for Kant, is a society full of inequality and servility"@, which is completely justified.

What is the relationship between the doctrine of virtue and Kant’s law of virtue?

This is a question that must be answered. Some virtues are deeply rooted in unequal social hierarchical conditions, and are premised on the actor's own promotion and devaluation of others, such as condescending sympathy and benevolence, or contempt

Any disdainful charity may violate the most basic basic obligations based on the law of virtue: equality and respect. Virtues that can be accepted by people with a sense of equality and self-respect can actually correspond to a certain kind of obligation, but the advocates of virtue ethics are not willing to admit this.

Kant had solved this problem with the law of virtue "given" as "the only fact of pure reason." Choose an action that conforms

or goes against the law. You must first have an understanding of the law,

and this law is the categorical imperative: "Only act in accordance with principles that you also believe can

become universal laws."@ Therefore, contrary to what virtue ethics

says, a virtue is a virtue because

it arises from the laws of virtue and the concept of duty. We can find a broad correspondence between virtues and duties (from the law of virtue): (as duties) benevolence, justice, honesty, etc., correspond (as virtues) benevolence, fairness, loyalty, etc.

Coincidentally, G. J． In his book "The Purpose of Morality", Warnock also pointed out a series of correspondences between obligations and virtues: the basic principles of moral obligations perfectly Corresponds to the basic virtues. He discussed the correspondence between four basic virtues and moral principles: (1) no malice, (2) fairness, (3) benevolence, and (4) no malice. cheat. We dare to assume that these four temperaments are (at least) basic moral virtues... Here, if we admit that according to these "good temperaments" we have four moral virtues, Virtues, then, from this proposition we have, four basic moral standards or principles of morality are deduced under the same name, without much

being likely to give rise to controversy"o. Among them, as to not cheating In terms of moral virtue, it corresponds to a basic moral principle: no cheating; if a person violates this principle, it can be considered that the person does not have the "not to cheat"

The virtue of "cheating". The correspondence between several other virtues and principles can also be viewed in this way.

As mentioned above, in the critical perspective of the law of virtue, virtue is actually an initiative and tendency cultivated in the activities of fulfilling obligations and the law of virtue. This initiative and tendencies will allow people to effortlessly overcome perceptual motives that are contrary to their obligations, make them almost feel no resistance to obligations, and feel happy from practice, and achieve their own moral personality

obtain great happiness in the process, and further promote people to fulfill these obligations and even exceed what these obligations require. Among them, it is the law of virtue and the obligations it determines that make behavior a virtue, and some traditional virtues that are not in line with the law of virtue have been excluded from the virtues. The relationship between the law of virtue or obligation and virtue is very clear: virtue is worthy of praise and cultivation, but the law of virtue is the decisive thing; virtue can be lacking, but virtue must not be violated the obligations commanded by law; the absence of the former is simply the absence of something praiseworthy, while the absence of the latter is the absence of what makes human life possible. Something indispensable; we may say that virtue is the icing on the cake, while law is the icing on the cake, just as courage is the virtue of the soldier. Obedience to orders is the responsibility of soldiers. You can lack the former, but you cannot violate the latter.

Notes:

① The use of the concept of virtue in this article has some special distinctions that are helpful for discussing the issue: such as identifying the characteristics of virtue as actions. (Tat), and the characteristics of virtue are determined as intention (Gesl

n—

nung), virtue (V1rtUe) and virtue (dinggend) and virtue

(S1ttl1Chkel

t) The difference is that virtue is those behavioral qualities that are worthy of high praise

and go beyond ordinary performance or moral behavior out of duty (prudence, prudence, Generosity, bravery, etc.), they give the agent noble qualities and extraordinary image or charm. In the discussion of this article, these three concepts are used differently, especially the concept of beauty

The concept of virtue (V1rtue) and the concept of virtue (Tugend) cannot be confused.

Wanfang Data

Philosophy? Ethics

PH｝LOSOPHYANDETHlCS

②A1

eksanderJ0k1C:. Superetogatl

013

a

FId

Horal

LuCk: Two

Probl

ellis

for

Kant．

OneS01utlOn. ． Thedournal of Va1ue

In—

qUlry36: 221-233, 2002.

③②Tom L. Beacham． The ethics of philosophy［H］． Kanned by Lei Ke

and translated by Guo Xiajuan and others. China Social Sciences Press, 1993:

222.253.

③⑤⑦⑨⑩⑩⑩ Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics

［H］． Self-translated and annotated by Liao Zhong. Commercial Press, 2005: 276-

277, 275-276, 109-110, 19-20, 19, 305-308.

⑥McIntyre． The history of ethics [H]. Translated by Gong Qun. Business Print

Library.

2004:105．

⑧McIntyre． Pursuing virtue［M］. Translated by Song Jijie, translated by Lin Chu

Publishing House. 2003:205.

⑨Kant. Critique of Practical Reason［H］. Translated by Deng Xiaomang and edited by Yang Zutao

. People's Publishing House, 2003: 177-178.

⑩S1m013

B1ackbUrFI：Oxfordd1Ctlo—

na

ry

of

phl10sophy, Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,

2000: 23.

⑩⑩⑩⑩①Kant. Critique of Practical Reason［H］． Translated by Deng Xiaomang

and edited by Yang Zutao. People's Publishing House, 2003: 26-29, 51-

52, 52, 99, 41.

⑩The

CambrldgeCompan{on

to

Kal3t,

Edltedby

Paul

Guyer. CambrldgeUnlVer—

s

1ty

P

ress, 1992. Sanlian Bookstore, 2006: 311. These three quotations

are translated by the author.

③Kant. Principles of Moral Metaphysics［H］. Translated by Miao Litian.

Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2005: 39.

(Author’s unit: School of Political Science and Law, Chongqing University of Arts and Sciences)

New Oriental 2009.10 session

How does Kant view virtue - Laws and virtues: a critical perspective Virtue Ethics in Chinese

Author: Author Unit: Journal Title: English Journal Title: Year, Volume (Issue):

Yu Le

Chongqing University of Arts and Sciences Politics and Law College New Oriental

THE NEW RIENT2009(10)

References (11 items)

1. Paul Guyer The Campidge Companion to Kant 1992

2. There are some special distinctions in the use of the concept of virtue in this article that are helpful in discussing the problem: just as the characteristics of virtue are identified as actions (Tat), and the characteristics of virtue are identified as intentions (Gesinnung), virtue ( The difference between virtue) and virtue (Tugend) and virtue (Sittlichkeit) is that virtue is those behavioral qualities (prudence, generosity, courage, etc.) that are worthy of high praise and go beyond ordinary fulfillment or moral behavior arising from obligations. They make The behavioral subject has noble qualities and extraordinary image or charm. In the discussion of this article, these three concepts are used separately, especially the concept of virtue and the concept of Tugend cannot be confused

3. Kant; Miao Litian Principles of Moral Metaphysics 20054. Kant; Deng Xiaomang; Yang Zutao Critique of Practical Reason 2003

5. Simon Blackburn: Oxford dictionary of philosophy 20006. Kant; Deng Xiaomang; Yang Zutao Practical Reason Critique of Reason 20037. MacIntyre; Song Jijie’s Pursuit of Virtue 20038. MacIntyre; Gong Qun’s Brief History of Ethics 20049. Aristotle; Liao Shenbei’s Nicomachean Ethics 2005

10. Tom· L. Beachum; Lei Keqin; Guo Xiajuan Philosophical Ethics 1993

11. Aleksander Jokic Supererogaton and Moral Luck: Two Problems fo

r Kant, One Solution 2002

Link to this article: .com.cn/Periodical_xindf200910011.aspx