BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Alangilan Campus
HOW IS MORAL
CHARACTER
DEVELOPED?
Module 8
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.
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.
Development of moral character can be explained by the
following approaches: virtues, disposition, and circular
relations of acts and character, and theoretical
perspectives.
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 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).
Moral Character and Virtues
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.
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.
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.
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.
Moral Character and Virtues
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.
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.
It is important to note that for Aristotle, virtue depends on “clear judgment,
self-control, symmetry of desire, and artistry of means.” 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.
Moral Character and Virtues
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.
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.
Indeed, moral virtue can be defined simply as the just
mean.
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.
Moral Character as Dispositions
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.
Moral character affects one’s moral decision.
This character is a personality trait or disposition that has become
habituated in the individual moral agent. Indeed, it is something
that is developed, nurtured and cultivated.
Moral Character as Dispositions
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.
Moral Character as Dispositions
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.
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.
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.
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.
A. Repetition of Action and its Effect on the Person
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.
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).
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, 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.
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.
C. Intention and Responsibility
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.
C. Intention and Responsibility
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.
C. Intention and Responsibility
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.
C. Intention and Responsibility
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.
References
De Guzman, J. M., Tesico, M. D., & Paras, W. D. (2017). Ethics
Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society. Malabon City:
Mutya Publishing House, Inc.
Cohen, T. R, & Carnegie, L. M. (2014). Moral Character: What it is
and what is does. Accessed July 30, 2020
[Link]
racter_What_it_is_and_what_it_does
Philonotes. Moral Development and the Moral Agents. Accessed
August 5, 2020
[Link]
Timpe, K. (2002). Moral Character. Accessed August 5, 2020
[Link]
References
Beauchamp, T. L. (2001). Philosophical Ethics (3rd ed). Boston: McGraw
Hill.
Yarza, Ignatius (1994). History of Ancient Philosophy. Manila: Sinag-Tala
Publishers.
Durant, W. (1926). The story of philosophy. New York: Washington Square
Press.
Temporal, D. (2016). Notes on Ethics Training. Ateneo De Manila
University.
Mitchell, L. A. (2015). Integrity and Virtue: The Forming of Good
Character. Accessed August 5, 2020 doi:
10.1179/2050854915Y.0000000001
[Link]