Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 387–409

Seeing by Feeling: Virtues, Skills, and Moral Perception

Article

Abstract

Champions of virtue ethics frequently appeal to moral perception: the notion that virtuous people can “see” what to do. According to a traditional account of virtue, the cultivation of proper feeling through imitation and habituation issues in a sensitivity to reasons to act. Thus, we learn to see what to do by coming to feel the demands of courage, kindness, and the like. But virtue ethics also claims superiority over other theories that adopt a perceptual moral epistemology, such as intuitionism – which John McDowell criticizes for illicitly “borrow[ing] the epistemological credentials” of perception. In this paper, I suggest that the most promising way for virtue ethics to use perceptual metaphors innocuously is by adopting a skill model of virtue, on which the virtues are modeled on forms of practical know-how. Yet I contend that this model is double-edged for virtue ethics. The skill model belies some central ambitions and dogmas of the traditional view, especially its most idealized claims about virtue and the virtuous. While this may be a cost that its champions are unprepared to pay, I suggest that virtue ethics would do well to embrace a more realistic moral psychology and a correspondingly less sublime conception of virtue.

Keywords

intuitionism McDowell moral epistemology moral perception moral psychology skill virtue 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Annas, J., Virtue Ethics, in D. Copp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  2. Doris, J., Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. Dreyfus, H.L. and Dreyfus, S.E., What is Morality? A Phenomenological Account of the Development of Ethical Expertise, in D. Rasmussen (ed.), Universalism vs. Communitarianism: Contemporary Debates in Ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. Elster, J., Norms of Revenge.Ethics 100 (1990), pp. 862–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lincoln-Kieser, R., Death Enmity in Thull.American Ethologist 13 (1986), pp. 500–501.Google Scholar
  6. Hursthouse, R., On Virtue Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. Hursthouse, R., Virtue Ethics, in E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2003 Edition). < http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2003/entries/ethics-virtue/>.
  8. McDowell, J., Mind, Value, and Reality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. Mill, J.S., Civilization, in Dissertations and Discussions. Honolulu, Hawaii: University Press of the Pacific, 2002, pp. 130–167.Google Scholar
  10. Stratton-Lake, P. (ed.), Ethical Intuitionism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bowling Green State UniversityBowling GreenUSA

Personalised recommendations