Appiah: The Case Against Character

Brian Fratto
9/10
    

     In Kwame Appiah's Experiments in Ethics, he discusses the differences between situational ethics and virtue ethics in the chapter: "The Case against Character".  With situational ethics, it is argued that the many of the decisions we make are directly influenced by the situations we find ourselves in, rather than the compassion that one finds within themselves. This bold claim has been backed by significant evidence showing that situation, such as being late for an appointment, does play a large role in whether or not a person will act in a compassionate way. A social experiment showed that after finding a dime in a mall payphone,  six out of seven people stopped to assist a person  in need. In the control group, only one out of twenty-five people stopped and helped the person. Virtue ethics on the other hand, states that “The right thing to do is what a virtuous agent would do in the circumstances.” (Rosalind Hursthouse). Thus, a virtuous person would stop to help a person regardless of any immediate outside influences. However, the study of situational ethics seems to challenge the fact that very many people act solely out of virtue.
            Appiah makes the point that we often make the mistake of misjudging people as compassionate due to the Fundamental Attribution Theory, a cognitive bias that forces us to attribute actions to a person’s morals as opposed to the current circumstances they find themselves in. Due to this, Appiah claims that is incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to actually determine whether or not a person fits the idealistic definition of ‘virtuous’. However, he does state that by understanding that situational ethics exists, a person might be able to correct themselves of these faults by identifying situations where they might "be tempted to avoid doing what [they] ought to do"