David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophy 86 (7):373-384 (1989)
In The Virtues of Ignorance the author demonstrates that classical theories of virtue are flawed and developes a consequentialist theory of virtue. ;Virtues are excellences of character. They are traits which are considered to be valuable in some way. A person who is virtuous is one who has a tendency to act well. Classical philosophers, such as Plato and Aristotle, believed that virtues, as human excellences, could not involve ignorance in any way. On their view, the virtuous agent, when acting well, knows what she is doing under the description which makes the action conform to virtue. For example, the generous person must know that she is, in fact, helping others in need. Yet, there is a class of virtues, the "virtues of ignorance," which essentially involve ignorance. For example, modesty requires that the agent underestimate self worth. In the first portion of the dissertation, this class of virtues is discussed, and problems raised for the traditional theories of virtue. ;In the latter portion of the dissertation, the author outlines a consequentialist theory of virtue. It is argued that the only hope of developing a unified theory of virtue is along consequentialist lines, because attempts at identifying the psychological state which is necessary for virtue have failed. On a consequentialist theory, a virtue is defined in terms of its consequences. Thus, the moral quality of the character trait is determined by how much good it brings about . The virtues of ignorance can easily be accommodated in such a theory because these traits do bring about good, even if the agent possessing the trait acts out of ignorance
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Rik Peels (2010). What is Ignorance? Philosophia 38 (1):57-67.
Kurt Sylvan (forthcoming). The Illusion of Discretion. Synthese:1-31.
Andy Egan (2011). Comments on Gendler's, “the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias”. Philosophical Studies 156 (1):65-79.
Michael P. Levine & Jacqueline Boaks (2013). What Does Ethics Have to Do with Leadership? Journal of Business Ethics 124 (2):1-18.
Nomy Arpaly (2014). Duty, Desire and the Good Person: Towards a Non‐Aristotelian Account of Virtue. Philosophical Perspectives 28 (1):59-74.
Similar books and articles
Julia Driver (2001). Uneasy Virtue. Cambridge University Press.
Michael Slote (2004). Driver's Virtues. Utilitas 16 (1):22-32.
Michael Jeffrey Winter (2012). Does Moral Virtue Require Knowledge? A Response to Julia Driver. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (4):533 - 546.
Rik Peels (2011). Tracing Culpable Ignorance. Logos and Episteme 2 (4):575-582.
Erinn Gilson (2011). Vulnerability, Ignorance, and Oppression. Hypatia 26 (2):308-332.
Robert C. Roberts (1992). Emotions Among the Virtues of the Christian Life. Journal of Religious Ethics 20 (1):37 - 68.
Wayne Ouderkirk (2010). The Virtues of Ignorance. Environmental Ethics 32 (1):107-110.
Gideon Rosen (2002). Culpability and Ignorance. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 103 (1):61–84.
Ronald Sandler (2005). Ignorance and Virtue. Philosophical Papers 34 (2):261-272.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads184 ( #16,150 of 1,790,256 )
Recent downloads (6 months)25 ( #32,350 of 1,790,256 )
How can I increase my downloads?