Scribd
Upload
256 views4 pages

Developing Moral Character in Ethics

This document discusses three approaches to developing moral character: virtues, dispositions, and the circular relationship between acts and character. It explains that virtues involve practicing moderation and developing tendencies through habit. Moral character can also be viewed as relatively stable dispositions. Repeated acts can form habits and affect one's character, while different types of acts and intentions also influence character development in a circular way. The goal is for students to understand and apply these approaches to analyzing their own moral development.

Uploaded by

Alhysa Catapang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
256 views4 pages

Developing Moral Character in Ethics

This document discusses three approaches to developing moral character: virtues, dispositions, and the circular relationship between acts and character. It explains that virtues involve practicing moderation and developing tendencies through habit. Moral character can also be viewed as relatively stable dispositions. Repeated acts can form habits and affect one's character, while different types of acts and intentions also influence character development in a circular way. The goal is for students to understand and apply these approaches to analyzing their own moral development.

Uploaded by

Alhysa Catapang
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
  • MODULE 8: How is Moral Character Developed?

Ethics- BatStateU

MODULE 8
HOW IS MORAL CHARACTER DEVELOPED?

Introduction
This module discusses how our moral character is developed. This was further explained
using three approaches such as virtuous, dispositions, and circular relations of acts and character.
This module teaches students to be virtuous, to have relatively stable, fixed and reliable
dispositions of action, and to practice moderation. Lastly, it teaches students to know one’s
intention and to know the effect of action on their character and to be morally responsible of their
deeds.

Learning Objectives
At the end of the topic, students are expected to:
e) Compare and contrast the three approaches of development of moral character such as
virtues, dispositions and, circular relations of acts and character.
f) Identify instances in their life where they applied those approaches.
g) Analyze which approaches is commonly used by Filipinos and explain why.

Learning Content

Moral Character and its Development

Moral character refers to the existence or lack of virtues such as integrity, courage,
fortitude, honesty, and loyalty. To say that a certain person has a good moral character means that
he/she is a good person and a good citizen with a sound moral compass (De Guzman et al., 2017).
It can be conceptualized as an individual’s disposition to think, feel, and behave in an ethical versus
unethical manner, or as the subset of individual differences relevant to morality (Cohen &
Carnegie, 2014). Development of moral character can be explained by the following approaches:
virtues, disposition, and circular relations of acts and character, and theoretical perspectives (De
Guzman et al., 2017 and [Link]).

Moral Character and Virtues


Etymologically, the term “character” comes from the ancient Greek term charaktêr, which
initially referred to the mark impressed upon a coin. The term charaktêr later came to refer more

Page 60
Ethics- BatStateU

generally to any distinctive feature by which one thing is distinguished from others. Along this
general line, in contemporary usage character often refers to a set of qualities or characteristics
that can be used to differentiate between persons. It is used this way, for example, commonly in
literature. In philosophy, however, the term character is typically used to refer to the particularly
moral dimension of a person. For example, Aristotle most often used the term ēthē for character,
which is etymologically linked to “ethics” and “morality” (via the Latin equivalent mores) (Timpe,
2002).
One way to explain character development is through the virtue ethics approach. Virtue
ethics represents the concept that individual’s actions are based upon inner moral virtue where
Aristotle was the leading figure of it ([Link]). Virtue is a central concept in
his Nicomachean Ethics wherein there are two distinct of human excellences, (1) excellences of
thoughts and (2) excellences of character (De Guzman et al., 2017). Now, in virtue ethics, one
does not ask the question, “what morally ought we to do?”; rather, virtue ethics posits that the basic
function of morality is the moral character of persons (Beauchamp, 2001). In relation to this,
Beauchamp suggests that virtue should not be thought of as a moral requirement, because this
confuses with a principle or rule. Rather, virtue is a character trait that is socially valued
([Link]).
Aristotle considered goodness of character as a product of the practice of virtuous behavior.
This means that for Aristotle, virtuous acts are not the end results of a good character. In fact,
according to Aristotle, virtues are tendencies to act, to feel, and judge, tendencies which are
developed from natural capacity through proper training and exercise (Yarza, 1994). He believed,
therefore, that practice creates a habit of acting in a virtuous way. Again, it is for this reason that
virtue is something that can be learned and improved (Yarza, 1994). It is important to note that for
Aristotle, virtue depends on “clear judgment, self-control, symmetry of desire, and artistry of
means” (Durant, 1926, 75). Hence, virtue can be viewed as a fruit of intelligent pursuit. The virtue
of excellence, for example, can be achieved by training and habituation, and that a virtuous
character is created by repeatedly acting in a virtuous manner ([Link]).
But how can a person be virtuous? It is important to note that a virtuous behavior for
Aristotle means practicing moderation, that is, avoiding both excess and deficiency (Temporal,
Notes, 2016. See also the chapter on Aristotle’s virtue ethics). Aristotle calls this the doctrine of
the mean. This “doctrine of the mean” is a principle that suggests that a moral behavior is one that
is in the middle of two extremes. For example, between gain and disadvantage is justice, and
between shameless and touchiness is modesty (Temporal). Indeed, moral virtue can be defined
simply as the just mean ([Link]).

Moral Character as Dispositions


Dispositions are particular kinds of properties or characteristics that objects can possess.
Examples of dispositions include the solubility of a sugar-cube in water, the fragility of porcelain,
the elasticity of a rubber band, and the magnetism of a lodestone (Timpe, 2002).
Moral character traits are those dispositions of character for which it is appropriate to hold
agents morally responsible. A trait for which the agent is deserving of a positive reactive attitude,
such as praise or gratitude, is a virtue, and a vice is a trait for which the agent is deserving of a
negative reactive attitude, such as resentment or blame. Moral character traits are relatively stable,
fixed and reliable dispositions of action and affect that ought to be rationally informed. The
subsequent sub-sections will further elucidate these various aspects of moral character traits
(Timpe, 2002). Moral character affects one’s moral decision. This character is a personality trait

Page 61
Ethics- BatStateU

or disposition that has become habituated in the individual moral agent. Indeed, it is something
that is developed, nurtured and cultivated ([Link]).
Moral character traits are not just dispositions to engage in certain outward behaviors; they
can also be dispositions to have certain emotions or affections. For example, justice is the
disposition to treat others as they deserve to be treated, while courageousness is the disposition to
feel the appropriate amount of fear called for by a situation. Additionally, as mentioned above with
regard to dispositions in general, an individual can have a particular moral character trait and not
currently be manifesting trait-relevant behavior or affect. An individual may be generous in her
giving to charity, even if she is not engaged presently in any charitable action (Timpe, 2002).
It is important to consider that moral character is not something that is imposed from the
outside, but something that springs from the will of the moral agent. Hence, a moral character
develops as he/she grows into maturity. We may view moral character as a disposition or tendency
to act or think in a specific way for which a person can be held morally responsible
[Link]).

The Circular Relation of Acts and Character


The other side of the relation between moral character and action is the effect of action on
character. Three aspects of action relevant to this are repetition of action and its effect on the
person, the type of action, and intention and responsibility (Mitchell, 2015).

A. Repetition of Action and its Effect on the Person


Actions can be repetitive or automatic in (at least) three different ways: by habit, by
education, and by habitus (Mitchell, 2015). When an action is constantly repeated, over time it can
become a habit. For example, the physician who automatically writes a prescription for
contraception for patients who ask and no longer thinks it through has acquired a habit. Another
type of automatic action is a skill (education). Actions become skills through repetition and
experience. For example, the baker automatically stops kneading the bread dough when it reaches
a certain elasticity. These actions are done without consciously thinking through all the steps and
reasoning and judgments. A third way actions become automatic is through what Aquinas
calls habitus, that is, inclination or disposition, an inclination, a willingness, to respond charitably
to anyone in need as the situation arises. For example, I see a person without a coat shivering in
the middle of winter and give them my coat, and on and on (Mitchell, 2015).
While this example is about charity, there is nothing about habitus that requires it to be
good. One may also will to be miserly and act in a miserly way and therefore develop a bad
disposition or habitus of miserliness. The morality of the action also determines the morality of
the habitus. But not all acts can be cataloged as moral or immoral. There are different types or
categories of actions (Mitchell, 2015).

B. The Type of Action


Because human beings are body/soul unities, actions of the body are actions of the
self. Digestion of food is certainly an action, as is jumping when startled or yawning when tired.
Aquinas calls these acts of a human being (actus humanus) and distinguishes them from human
acts (actus humanis) (Mitchell, 2015). Human acts are rational acts and are more closely associated
with character than are acts of human beings, because the former actions come from the whole
person. Laughing at funny things is a moral act, in contrast to laughing because one is being tickled,

Page 62
Ethics- BatStateU

which is an act of a human being. In the former, there is choice. One can choose to laugh or not.
Laughing that is ridicule is a bad moral act. Laughing at oneself can be good (e.g., humbling). In
fact, training oneself to not laugh at racist jokes or sexual innuendos is considered by many to be
a moral responsibility (Mitchell, 2015).

C. Intention and Responsibility


Two important aspects of the revelatory nature of action are responsibility and
intention. Human beings own their actions and the consequences of them. This even applies to
actions that are accidental rather than willed and chosen. The will is the rational power of human
beings to act. It is the ability to choose what is good (or what one thinks is good) directed by reason
(Aquinas, 1948 and Wojtyla, 1979).
Responsibility and intention are rooted in the will, which is the source of the self-
possession and self-governance of human beings. Self-possession is different from possession of
an object. One can own or hold an object, such as a rock, and therefore have possession of it. But
one owns and holds oneself internally in a way one cannot with a rock. We are conscious of the
rock as something that is external, but we are conscious of ourselves from the inside. We are both
the object of our consciousness and the subject (Wrathall, 2005).
One can be prevented from doing something by external forces, but carrying through with
an action has an element of the voluntary, of willing to do it and therefore cannot be forced. For
example, a physician may feel forced to write prescriptions for contraception through fear of
ostracism or losing his job, but at the point at which he actually writes the prescription, he is no
longer forced but actually willing the writing of the prescription (Aristotle, n.d. and Aquinas,
1993).
Another way the will can be hindered is by lack of knowledge. One may attempt to drive
across a flooded bridge thinking the water is low enough to get through but then get stuck, because
it was really two feet above the bridge. But if one knows that the water is that high, one would not
drive across it or will to drive across it, because one knows the car will stall in the middle (Aristotle,
n.d., Aquinas, 1993 and Joh Paul I Pope, 1993).
According to Mitchell (2015), the human being is self-governing in that he can carry out a
human action or not carry it out as he wills. He can choose to write a prescription or chose not to
write it. Because of self-possession and self-governance, human beings both intend their actions
and have responsibility for their actions.

Page 63

Common questions

Powered by AI

The 'circular relations of acts and character' approach posits that there is a reciprocal relationship between actions and moral character—actions influence and shape character, while character influences the nature of one's actions . This approach identifies three aspects of action as significant: repetition of action, type of action, and intention and responsibility. Repeated actions can form habits, which in turn mold one's character, exemplifying virtuous or non-virtuous dispositions depending on the nature of the actions . The type of action, whether rational (human acts) or non-rational (acts of a human being) defines the relationship with character, as rational acts are more directly tied to moral character . Intention and responsibility highlight the proactive choice behind actions, underlining the moral agent's responsibility in shaping their character and the moral implications of their deeds .

Aristotle's concept of virtue ethics emphasizes the development of moral character through the practice of virtuous behaviors. Virtue ethics posits that virtuous acts arise from inner moral virtues, meaning that aspects of moral character are not merely about following rules but developing traits such as courage, honesty, and integrity over time . The role of 'habituation' is central to this development, as Aristotle believed that virtues are tendencies to act, feel, and judge, which are developed from one's natural capabilities through proper training and repeated exercise . Therefore, virtuous behavior becomes habitual through consistent practice, indicating that virtue can be learned and improved upon through continuous effort .

In the context of moral character, 'disposition' refers to the stable, reliable tendencies of individuals to act or feel in certain ways . Dispositions are critical in understanding moral character as they represent the innate properties that govern ethical behaviors, which are cultivated and informed through rational reflection. Within this framework, virtues and vices are defined as moral character traits for which the moral agent receives positive or negative reactive attitudes. A virtue is a trait deserving of praise or gratitude, while a vice is one that incurs resentment or blame . The stability and reliability of these dispositions are imperative, as they inform actions and emotional responses, highlighting their role in ethical decision-making and moral responsibility .

Aristotle's virtue ethics and the disposition approach both aim at developing moral character but differ in their perception and emphasis on moral actions. Virtue ethics focuses on the inner moral virtues that guide actions, emphasizing the importance of habituating virtuous behaviors to shape character. Here, virtues are seen as moral excellences developed through practice and the intelligent pursuit of moderation, epitomized by Aristotle's doctrine of the mean . Conversely, the disposition approach views moral character as composed of stable, reliable tendencies to act in certain ways and considers moral character traits as dispositions that inform an individual's actions and emotional responses . While virtue ethics values the cultivation of inner character traits through repeated practice, the disposition approach sees these traits as inherent properties that guide ethical behaviors. Hence, while both emphasize the influence of moral character on actions, virtue ethics aligns more closely with the role of practice and habituation, whereas dispositions stress innate propensities operationalized in moral contexts .

Moral character, as a subset of individual differences, encompasses one's tendencies to think, feel, and act in ways that align with ethical or unethical standards, making it a distinguishing aspect of personality in moral contexts . These differences imply that individuals have varying capacities and predispositions to perceive and respond to moral dilemmas, affecting their decision-making processes. Having a good moral character involves possessing virtues that guide ethical decision-making, such as honesty, integrity, and courage, and these traits influence how one evaluates situations and determines appropriate actions . The implications for moral decision-making are significant, as individual differences in moral character can lead to divergent assessments of ethical situations and choices made. This variability enhances the complexity of moral reasoning by introducing diverse perspectives and approaches in evaluating the morality of actions, thereby affecting the outcomes of moral judgments and the consistency in ethical behavior .

Moderation, known as the doctrine of the mean, is a fundamental element in Aristotle's virtue ethics, highlighting its significance in the development of moral character by encouraging balance and avoidance of extremes in behavior . According to Aristotle, virtues are often the mean between two vices, one of excess and the other of deficiency. For example, courage is the median between recklessness and cowardice, and moderation ensures that individuals adopt virtuous traits without falling into vice . This promotes the development of a well-rounded moral character, as adherence to moderation supports the cultivation of balanced and reasonable behavioral tendencies. The significance of moderation lies in its practical applicability; it provides a framework for cultivating virtues through deliberate and conscious effort in achieving balance, thereby fostering ethical discipline and self-control . This contributes to moral character by ensuring that individuals strive for an equilibrium that reflects both personal and societal ideals of virtue, facilitating holistic ethical development and consistency in moral decision-making .

Intention and responsibility are pivotal in determining the moral value of an action as they represent the agent's ownership and conscious decision-making in performing actions . Intention refers to the willful choice made by an individual to perform an act, guided by rationality and awareness of consequences, thus implicating moral responsibility . Responsibility is linked to intention in that it reflects the moral agent's accountability for the outcomes of their choices and actions. Self-governance, in this context, refers to the autonomy and control that individuals possess over their actions, emphasizing their ability to consciously decide and act upon moral principles . Therefore, intention and responsibility are integral to self-governance, as they empower individuals to act ethically and be accountable for the moral implications of their actions .

Aquinas's concept of 'habitus' refers to the ingrained inclinations or tendencies that develop through repeated actions, influencing moral habits and character . 'Habitus' indicates that moral habits are formed by the consistent practice of certain types of behavior, which become automatic over time. This concept underscores the role of repetition in shaping either virtuous or non-virtuous dispositions, suggesting that both good and bad habits can form depending on the nature of the actions repeated . It posits that habitus, as a concept, is neutral and can apply to tendencies toward positive moral actions or negative ones, highlighting the potentiality for moral development or degradation. The morality of habitus is not inherent but is determined by the intentionality and nature of the actions that form the habitus, thereby emphasizing the moral agent’s responsibility in cultivating virtuous traits over vices through deliberate practice .

The distinction between 'human acts' and 'acts of human beings' lies in the rational faculty involved in their execution. 'Human acts' (actus humanis) are those performed with deliberate intent and choice, reflecting moral rationality and decision-making, which are more directly tied to the formation of moral character . In contrast, 'acts of human beings' (actus humanus) are actions that occur naturally without intentional rational choice, such as reflexes or involuntary bodily functions. The significance in moral character formation is that 'human acts' require conscious decision-making and thus have moral implications, as they offer an opportunity for individuals to exercise their judgment and ethical reasoning . These acts constitute moral responsibility and contribute to character development as they are expressions of the individual's values and virtues. Conversely, 'acts of human beings' do not hold moral significance as they are not products of rational choice or moral deliberation, highlighting their minimal impact on character formation .

Moral habit formation through repetition is a process where repeated actions become automatic responses that mold an individual's ethical framework over time . This concept emphasizes that consistent engagement in certain behaviors can solidify them into habits, which subsequently influence one's moral character. By repeatedly practicing virtues, such as honesty or generosity, these actions become ingrained, reinforcing ethical decision-making and guiding moral judgments in future situations . This process implies that moral habits can lead to a more stable and reliable character, as they dictate how an individual tends to react in moral contexts. However, the repetition of negative behaviors can also result in habits that negatively affect one's ethical framework, leading to the reinforcement of vices. Thus, the impact of repetition on moral habit formation is dual-faceted, with the capacity to both enhance and undermine the moral integrity of an individual based on the types of actions consistently reinforced, underscoring the importance of intentional practice in fostering positive ethical development .

Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 8 HOW IS MORAL CHARACTER DEVELOPED? Introduction This module discusses how our moral cha
Ethics- BatStateU 1 generally to any distinctive feature by which one thing is distinguished from others. Along this g
Ethics- BatStateU or disposition that has become habituated in the individual moral agent. Indeed, it is something that is
Ethics- BatStateU 1 which is an act of a human being. In the former, there is choice. One can choose to laugh or not.

You might also like