Virtue Ethics: Aristotle and the Doctrine of the Mean

Utilitarianism asks: “what outcome maximises good?” Kantian ethics asks: “what duty must I follow?” Aristotle’s virtue ethics asks a different question: “what kind of person should I become?” It’s the oldest of the three major ethical frameworks. It still shapes how “character” and “integrity” get discussed in civil-service ethics today.

MCQ Questions

Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

Virtue Ethics: What Kind of Person Should I Become?

Aristotle, 384–322 BCE — the oldest of the three major ethical frameworks

Highest Good

Eudaimonia

“Flourishing” through virtuous activity

Core Idea

Doctrine of the Mean

A virtue between excess and deficiency

How Virtue Forms

Habituation

We become what we repeatedly do

Two Kinds

Moral vs. Intellectual

Habit-formed vs. teaching-formed virtues

Practical Wisdom

Phronesis

Judging the right action, case by case

Key Text

Nicomachean Ethics

The foundational text

⇩ Download as image Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

Must Know

• Virtue ethics focuses on the character of the person acting, not on rules (deontology) or outcomes (consequentialism). It asks: what virtues, or character traits, does a good person have?
• The framework’s classical source is Aristotle (384–322 BCE). His work Nicomachean Ethics is the foundational text of virtue ethics.
• Aristotle’s central idea is eudaimonia, often translated as “flourishing” or “living well.” For Aristotle, this — not pleasure, not duty — is the highest human good. You reach it through a lifetime of virtuous activity.
• Aristotle’s most famous idea is the “Doctrine of the Mean.” A virtue, in this view, sits between two vices — one of excess, one of deficiency. Courage, for example, is the mean between the excess of recklessness and the deficiency of cowardice.

Good to Know

• Under the Doctrine of the Mean, generosity sits between wastefulness (excess) and stinginess (deficiency). Proper pride sits between vanity (excess) and undue humility (deficiency). The “mean” isn’t a mathematical average — it’s whatever response fits the situation.
• For Aristotle, virtue isn’t something you’re born with. You develop it through habituation — practising virtuous actions again and again until they become part of your character. This is often summed up in his own idea: we become what we repeatedly do.
• Aristotle split virtues into two kinds. Moral virtues, like courage and temperance, come from habit. Intellectual virtues, like wisdom and understanding, come mainly from teaching and experience. Practical wisdom — phronesis — is the intellectual virtue that lets a person judge the right action in a specific situation.
• Civil-service ethics discussions often invoke virtue ethics to explain why “character” and “integrity” matter beyond any single decision. The idea: consistently good conduct flows from a well-formed character, not just from following the right rule case by case.

Test Yourself

Please wait…

1. Which branch of ethics examines the nature and meaning of moral judgments themselves — what terms like ‘good’ or ‘right’ actually mean — rather than establishing standards for conduct?

Normative ethics

Applied ethics

Meta-ethics

Descriptive ethics

 Loading…

 

Great to Know

• Virtue ethics fell out of favour in Western philosophy for centuries, as deontology and consequentialism took over academic ethics. It saw a major revival in the mid-20th century. Philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe’s 1958 essay “Modern Moral Philosophy” gets much of the credit — it argued that both rule-based and outcome-based ethics had lost their coherence without a background theory of human flourishing.
• A standard criticism: virtue ethics can be less useful than deontology or consequentialism for an urgent, specific dilemma. Knowing that “a virtuous person would act with courage and prudence” doesn’t always tell you exactly what to do — unlike a clear rule, or a calculable outcome comparison.
• Aristotle’s virtue framework has clear parallels in Indian philosophy. The Bhagavad Gita’s stress on selfless action, performed for its own sake, is one example. Buddhist ethics’ Eightfold Path is another. Both focus on cultivating the right character and disposition, not purely on rules or outcomes — even though each tradition developed independently.