Topics Philosophers

Question Would Aristotle argue that torturing babies is evil in itself, and is not a virtue to be learned?

Accepted:
February 12, 2008

Comments

For Aristotle, actions were indicative of virtue (or vice), but not right or wrong in themselves. That is why, as most sscholars say these days, Aristotle's was a virtue theory rather than a theory of ethical (or moral) action. So I think the answer to your question is that Aristotle would not count torturing babes as evil in itself. It is difficult to imagine any cases in which such an action would be compatible with a just soul, and so would certainly count as a reliable indicator of vice in the agent performing such actions.

Aristotle also recognizes that not all good behavior flows from the virtuous condition of the soul, where the virtue is learned. There is also what he calls "natural virtue," which means something like the right sort of dispositions one has innately. Moreover, there are other conditions of humanity that would be regular and normal that would generall exclude things like torturning babies. Certainly refraining from torturing babies hardly counts as a virtue, and could well be the sort of thing one wwas inclined to do without much ethical habitation or enculturation.

Question Would Aristotle argue that torturing babies is evil in itself, and is not a virtue to be learned? Accepted:February 12, 2008

Question Would Aristotle argue that torturing babies is evil in itself, and is not a virtue to be learned?

Accepted:
February 12, 2008