254, Mori within Sef htt
fel he fee of tc seni" such athe por ad the opened in a
‘ny counties of which we tno itor fre ganeaons ee sl hae
deal the environmental degradation tat wehune tet bchind uti hard ose
‘ow hiss of vice depne af many plese bt eyo how wl pe
wie ate tht more ious peopl wl el
Inshot, Burs came about the hamony of vie and self sem
'npaiblefo me. Nonetheless hi lanssbout ou “elation othe preci ef
wi" eem tome eset covet We mt think faethe had iat
{uous the ight reper ie for ola eventhough by ving uch 9 He
‘expos useless ouces of pin ad ant at he ice fel
_ness would spare us from." 7
14. The pais em Das Hume, Eng Cancering the Pini: of Mor
LA Shree edb PH Nich (Ox Codon, she
4s. Antler at of hi paper as rset ta iene he Unive of esd
ig [gm gmc emi of i ses aw Fl Behe eo
‘hs chang t Slepen Dural aed om Oxford cllepes Robert ns il Ch
ator Ege Dr Caer, Doi Edge, nd Ove Psy bela eess
10
Virtue Ethics and the Charge
of Egoism
JULIA ANNAS
We cae sbout being generous, courageots ad fait, This looks a though we eate
about oer people, since what we cate abo is having a dspostion to help others,
‘espe thei ight, and intervene when they are threatened. But iit comet for
fencer far thers to come in byway of my own dapestons?Iseaing about tue
‘csi too much on myrel? Th wor hasbeen the basi of objections that ite
thes. 8 theo. isla or egos In eecent yest dfendes of vewe ethics
bane provided many responses, ba he objection keep coming up in rersed for
The objection canbe met and dicussion ofthe tue ial weal n helping to
see wha ite eis, not jut what ts not
"The egoizm in question here i ehialegotn, the theory that hold
cum god tthe ethical standard fr what right fr metodo, the post
{should have, and o on. The theory comes in several versions, depending on the
‘ny diferent posible interpretations of what my own god is My own good might
beet to const in my having the maximum pleasure, ort might be piven other
content, such as ny sting my desis, orachicing what iin my own interes
(And diferent versions will result rom distinguishing what satay in my ifeess
frm hat I merely hink to bein my interests) Some versions of ego ate inter
‘ed in my own good merely sa standard for “the rightness of ction, whileathers
Unk it alo 2s what ties my having some dpeitions ater than thes, But
feepreent purposes | don think thet t mater to dtinguh thee eons The
‘ese ides of ecal ego that what ebialy sis hat I'd, and the way
am, my own good, where thats dstne from, and petentally in confit with,
‘he god others. And we find at once a problem in theses that hi coud be
tthiea potion because ofthe very basic thought that ches fundamentally about
the god of others, ont my good
+. Theres ter poblens wt eos a theo bt we mates here the ps
‘hanes eines thought oe sb he gad a oes tha fing You om
pede wg fom he stat296 Moray within Sites
Why woul none think hat vue this is eg?
‘Whatisa ite? Aminima conception that a dspositon or character a,
Virus at att characte tat, hoes, nce eines or stebbormes as
natitues, Vite ae character ats which ren some may desable Bul ner
src they js desl charter as ane and punchy are ee baba hare,
‘ut not yet vies. Avie teat a character tit which smiable ebay
‘nga commitment a some eical aa we deny, we lng cnet ooh
cvendiy dco abut vitue and vinuous people as we can se we loka
‘plat fits Courage, mes and pace seal ites Theyre ta
iyi eluent shisha desipinabel sie cre bes
Se ee hints oay a tea tase Troma ee
apni ted eo se
Souci Ncereenee ents
2. Bia Hale.“ Mol Vie 3 Benet othe Ago” n How Shoal One Lin?
gn he Vine ed Roger Cry. (Osod Ox Une es
8" Rosind Huthoe, On Via hes On Cond Uae Pe238 Morel within Slr
when webring up children, we tach them tobe brave, generous, ans, and We
‘oso in their owm interests, not jst ours: we ake ttt a have a character af ce=
tain kind sa good way for them ove Few people infact doubt tha the vires are
‘goods which person has ean to want
Virtue eis wants more than this, of cous; it laims that wrt is, more
weal, neces or mote stongly, necessary and sufcent for urishing ms
2 Husk puts it “give these vitues poy over other gna, y stating tat they tt
‘uniquely neces fo ourshng”* Many cite ave tie to show tha! his ot
{gto suececd, because it depends oa showing that ve iimportant and cent
{oaperon's good, a view wbich x itis asertd “nat plausible” This Kind of bie
tions very familia virte eis is held to Bout common sense when it old that
virtue sat least necesary for leading life which ia Nourishing. good ene” For
thisclaimistrue,then the wacked are not eating Housing ves however weal
and glamorous they ae. Andi thie not completely counterntive?
Surprisingly many estes have thought that defender of virtue ethics old bth
that vite iat least neces for flourishing and that wealth, glamour, nd ahet
indieatons of suces at aecepable as indeaton of fourithing lie. Of cours,
this combination of postions is doomed to be hopelesly implausible, In fc,