Sermon for 28 May 2006, 1^st Unitarian Church of Alton, Illinois

 

VIRTUES AND VICES:  MODERN VIEWS

Ronald J. Glossop

 

I.  Introduction

    A.  Today I want to return to my discussion of virtues or good qualities of character and vices, that is qualities of character to be avoided or regarded as deficiencies if we have them.

    B.  My earlier discussion focused on the "classical" views of a few ancient or Medieval philosophers--Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, and Thomas Aquinas.  In a general way we can say that these philosophers viewed being virtuous as being "God"-like, as being more or less like a disembodied, disinterested mind guided by reason which could subdue the temptations of the animal body in which this mind was embodied or incarnated or trapped.  The agreed-upon definition of "human being" was "an animal which is rational."  Consequently, the essence of being a human rather than a beastly animal was to be guided by the immaterial intellect rather than the passions of the physical animal body.  Vices were viewed as the mind or soul being overcome by animal desires or tendencies such as lust for sex, gluttony for more food than needed, unbridled anger, laziness, and envy with regard to what others have.

    C.  This notion that the virtuous human is the rational human, that being guided by the immaterial mind is the ideal kind of life, has been a popular idea even among more modern philosophers, although in some cases the notion of rationality has been modified.

        1.  You may recall that in a sense even Aristotle amplified what "reason" means.  He noted that in addition to the theoretical reason of a disembodied mind, it was also desirable (but less important) for humans to have practical reason to guide them on how to live in the physical and social world.  For Aristotle following practical reason leads to moral virtue rather than the more "divine" intellectual virtue.  This less God-like moral virtue consists basically of hitting a mean and avoiding extremes in our everyday life.

        2.  In his discussion of virtue, Thomas Aquinas also introduced elements beyond the Greek conception of theoretical reason carried on by a disembodied mind when he included the Christian virtues of faith, hope, and love--virtues based not on philosophical reasoning but on spiritual insights supplied by revelation.

 

II.  I want now to turn to the views of Immanuel Kant, a modern philosopher whose views about morality are very similar to those of Plato and the Stoics with their focus on being guided by an immaterial mind that has the responsibility to overcome the temptations of the physical body.

    A.  Kant lived in Germany at the end of the 18th century (1724-1804).  He represents the culmination of the Enlightenment movement with its focus on reason and science.

    B.  Although Kant's conclusions about virtue & vice were similar to many of the ancients, he was a modern philosopher in that he was especially concerned about how one acquired one's knowledge.  How do we come to know what is right and what is wrong?

    C.  Furthermore, Kant realized that people in different parts of the world lived in different cultural environments and that many thinkers were saying that morality is completely relative and completely determined by where and when one lived.   But Kant argued that morality was not merely relative.  He claimed that there is an absolute and universal morality that all humans could know regardless of the environment in which they were raised.

    D.  The basic knowledge which all humans have is that we cannot just do whatever we please but must abide by rules and that these rules must be the same for everyone.  There is a Moral Law which everyone has an obligation to obey.  Furthermore, the virtuous persons, the persons who have a Good Will, are those who act in accord with this Moral Law.  Their virtue is especially evident when they follow the Law even when they have inclinations not to do so.  In fact, it is just this focus on following the Moral Law known by the intellectual immaterial mind in opposition to following the inclinations generated by the physical body that makes Kant's view so similar to the views of Plato and the Stoics.  In order to be virtuous the God-like part of the self has to prevail over the animal material body in which the eternal soul has been temporarily incarnated.

    E.  It is the form of this Moral Law (that the law must be the same for everyone) rather than the content that is self-evident.  We cannot know for certain exactly what the rules about good  behavior forbid or require in particular circumstances, but we can know for certain that the rules must be the same for everyone.

    F. Kant's formulation of this principle is his famous categorical imperative:  Act in such a way that you could will that the maxim of your behavior could become a universal law.  You can readily see that this statement is just a very sophisticated way of stating the Golden Rule, that we should act toward others as we would have them act toward us.

    G.  Kant emphasizes the point that what is critical for being a virtuous person is not whether you succeed in accomplishing some goals or even whether you abide by the laws and customs in the society where you happen to live but rather whether you have the right motivation, the desire to act in accord with the Moral Law, that is, to act in accord with the categorical imperative or Golden Rule.  The only thing that really matters in the long run is whether you have a Good Will.   

 

III.  The next modern philosopher whose views on virtue and vice I want to discuss is David Hume.

    A.  David Hume lived in Scotland (1711-1776) at the time of the Scottish Enlightenment, and he was a good friend of the well-known economist Adam Smith.  He was born 13 years earlier than Kant but died 28 years earlier, so essentially they were contemporaries.

    B.  Hume was very impressed by how Isaac Newton had succeeded in expanding and synthesizing humanity's growing knowledge of the physical world and decided that he would try to do something similar for our scientific knowledge of humans and their society.

    C.  As part of this effort Hume embarked on an empirical scientific study with regard to the issue of virtues and vices.  Rather than relying only on what previous philosophers and sages had to say about the topic, he was intent on doing an observational study. He wants to know not what someone says ought to be regarded as a virtue or a vice but what in fact is regarded as a virtue or a vice in everyday life.  Thus he started with a list of those qualities of character that everyone would in fact regard as virtues or as vices and then analyzed them in order to discover what the virtues have in common and what the vices have in common.  If you want to know whether some quality of character is a virtue or a vice, just ask yourself if someone ascribed that quality to you whether you would view it as a compliment or an insult.  For example, if someone says to you, "You're stupid", would you regard it as a compliment?

    D.  Starting out with qualities of character such as being benevolent, being law-abiding, keeping one's promises, and respecting the property of others Hume notes that the common feature is that these virtuous qualities of character are useful to the society.  Other virtues such as industriousness and intelligence and having a good memory are so regarded not only because they are useful to the society but also mainly because they are useful to the person who possesses them.  Vices, on the contrary, are those qualities of character which are harmful to society or detrimental to the person who possesses them.  

    E.  In addition there are other virtues such as cheerfulness or wittiness or gracefulness which are so regarded just because they are immediately pleasant or agreeable to others and to oneself.  Even though we ourselves may not be cheerful or witty, we regard those qualities as virtues just because we enjoy being with someone who is cheerful or witty.

    F.  Hume concludes that what we call virtues are simply those qualities of character which arouse our approbation because they are useful or agreeable to oneself or to others while vices are those that arouse our disapprobation because they are harmful or disagreeable to oneself or others.

    G.  He notes furthermore that the degree to which these virtues and vices are admired can change if their usefulness or agreeableness changes. For example, a good memory was a much more important virtue before the invention of writing, and the vice of not being able to write legibly becomes much less important after one has typewriters and computer-assisted printers.  Even the relative value of useful virtues versus agreeable virtues can change depending on the situation.   In a society of plenty, being witty is much more important than it is in a society of scarcity, where industriousness will be more highly valued.

    H.  Hume's analysis of why virtues arouse approbation while vices arouse disapprobation involves his interesting observations about empathy.  Being with someone who is competent and self-assured makes us feel comfortable while being with a nervous, incompetent person makes us feel uncomfortable.  We automatically empathize with other people.   People and animals even empathize with each other.  Seeing someone beat an animal will make us very uncomfortable because we will empathize with the animal and its suffering.  For Hume this empathy which we have for each other and to some extent for animals is the basis of morality.  Morality does not need to be based on any kind of religious doctrines.

    I.  It should be noted that for Hume there is no sharp distinction between qualities that can be changed by voluntary effort and those that can't.  It doesn't matter whether one's capacity to work for long hours without becoming fatigued is inborn or the result of much effort and training.  The same is true of traditional "virtues" such as courage and self-control. They are virtues because they are qualities that arouse the approbation of others regardless of whether they are voluntary or involuntary, inherited or developed.     

 

III.  The other two philosophers whose ideas I want to discuss are Friederich Nietzsche and John Dewey.  They are both post-Darwinian thinkers.  In fact, Dewey was born in 1859, the year when Origin of Species was published.  Both Nietzsche and Dewey were much influenced by the idea of biological evolution and thus viewed humans in a naturalistic way.  Nevertheless in many respects their views about virtues and vices are directly opposed to one another.

    A.  Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) lived in Germany and the German-speaking part of Switzerland.

    B.  Much of his thought was the result of his concern about what he regarded as the decline and decadence of European culture in the 19th century because of a tendency to undervalue individualism in the face of too much concern about the general welfare or common good as manifested in the ideals of Judaeo-Christian morality, democracy, utilitarianism, and socialism.  He proclaimed that  Europeans had to return to the more forceful aristocratic tradition of Homer and the ancient Greeks. 

    C.  On the issue of virtue and vice Nietzsche (who professionally was a philologist) noted that on the basis of his study of the evolution of language anyone could see that there really two very different kinds of morality:  (1) the "master morality" of those who have talent and wealth and power and (2) the "slave morality" of those who lack talent and wealth and power.   The master morality admires excellence and focuses on developing one's capabilities. For the "haves" pride and showing one's capabilities in competition are virtues. "Badness" is just the lack of excellence.

    D.  The slave morality, on the other hand, starts out from a resentment against the "haves" and focuses on condemning their arrogance and displays of superiority.  It emphasizes avoiding vices, which in fact are just the practices of those at the top of the society. For the "have-nots" pride and showing off one's capabilities are evils, and for them virtue consists in not committing such evils.  For the masses, to be a good person is simply to avoid doing the things that the aristocrats do.  "Don't be proud." "Don't lord it over the weak and poor."  "Don't steal." "Don't covet your neighbors' possessions."  "Don't commit adultery."  For slave morality the prime value is promoting equality as advocated by Judeao-Christian ethics, democracy, utilitarianism, and socialism. The traditional morality of the masses, which distrusts competition and the pride of winners, is in fact the embodiment of "slave morality."  

    E.  There is no doubt where Nietsche stands with regard to these competing systems of morality.  He supports the "master morality" which champions competition and recognizing the accomplishments of the aristocrats.  Nature, as is evident from Darwin's theory of evolution, is based on the struggle to prevail and survive and move to a higher level.  What superior humans need to do is to strive to become "superhumans," to embody a new level of what humans can be.  They need to challenge each other and not be held back by the notion that they have a moral obligation to help the masses who "don't have what it takes."

 

IV.  The fourth and last view to be discussed today is that of American pragmatist and "philosopher of democracy" John Dewey (1859-1952).

    A.  For Dewey being virtuous is a matter of being rational but with a new understanding of what that term "rational" means.  When we look at the evolution of life on Earth, we can see that what makes humans so successful is their capacity to solve problems through the use of intelligence, including if necessary actively modifying the physical environment and the institutions of society.  For Dewey being virtuous means being good at solving new problems both individually and collectively.

    B.  So what would might keep us from being good at solving new problems?  One thing would be not realizing that the world is constantly changing so there will always be new problems to address.  The world is always changing, but there is a tendency for people not to notice the changes and not to modify their own thinking and behavior even after the changes are noticed.  A good contemporary example of this is the problem of global warming.  The clues that relevant changes are occurring were noted some time ago.  Now the information is accumulating so rapidly that there is little doubt in the minds of those studying the changes objectively that global warming is occurring and that an important causal factor for this is the amount of carbon dioxide being put into the air by the burning of fossil fuels.  But there are still some with prejudices which keep them from being objective about the situation, and even those who are aware of the problem have different views about how to deal with it.  Nevertheless, the virtuous people are those who recognize that there is a problem and are brain-storming about the all the various things that might be done to deal with it and then acting on those strategies.

    C.  It is not only the world which is changing but also we are changing and our knowledge is changing.  Another thing that might keep us from being good at solving problems is not to pay attention to changes in ourselves and in the new knowledge and technology that can be used to address the problems.  Virtuous people take account on these changes.

    D.  Relying on unquestionable traditions and authorities instead of the scientific method can also thwart intelligent problem-solving.   Nothing can so readily obstruct intelligent problem-solving than the observation "But we've always done it this way" or the view that "Our beliefs are based on an authority that cannot be questioned."   A good example of this kind of situation in our contemporary world is the refusal to allow the use of condoms in order to check population growth and the spread of diseases such as HIV-AIDS.  Virtuous people will not be cut off from good solutions by appeals to traditions and authorities rather than the scientific method.

    E.  Another thing that can get in the way of intelligent problem-solving is the refusal to get information and insights from many different sources.  Dewey focused attention on the importance of democratic problem-solving rather than having a hierarchical system where the views of all but a small group of leaders are ignored.  Virtuous people will be open to various points of view from many different sources.

    F.  Still another thing that can get in the way of intelligent problem-solving is thelack of long-term thinking and thinking "out of the box."  Virtuous people will not allow possibilities to be ignored just because they involve a radically new way of looking at a problem and its solution.

    G.  Still another thing that can get in the way of intelligent problem-solving is the refusal to re-examine and possibly change the institutional structures which limit what can be done to deal with the problems at hand.  For example, the recalcitrant problem of war is not likely to be resolved as long as we refuse to re-examine the current international system based on national sovereignty and the feelings of nationalism which that system encourages.  Virtuous people will be open to even changing the existing institutional structure when the absence of such change can prevent the solution of the problem.

    H.  In summary, we can say that for Dewey being virtuous is a matter of having a certain mind-set which promotes good problem-solving because (1) we are sensitive to the fact that both the world and we ourselves are always changing, (2) we are committed to the use of the scientific method as the reliable way of getting information and are not restricted in our thinking by traditions and authorities which can't be questioned, (3) we are open to getting information from all sources and not just a small group of supervisors, and (4) we are ready to think long-term and to make radical changes if necessary.   

 

V.  In these two sermons about virtues and vices I have tried to provide you a quick overview of what I regard as significant ideas on that topic from Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, and John Dewey.  I hope that these ideas have been interesting to you and that you might want to incorporate some of their insights into your own thinking.