Yeah, I used to be of much the same opinion, but I...

2009-09-21T15:57:16.269-04:00

Yeah, I used to be of much the same opinion, but I find Foot's suggestion here pretty compelling. Note that she doesn't exactly deny that the Nazi may well be "exercising the virtue of courage". She merely stresses that the virtue in this case isn't operating characteristically, since what makes something a virtue is (according to Foot) that it tends to produce good action. It might occasionally fail to do so, just as a poison may in certain circumstances fail to cause harm when ingested. But in that case it isn't operating as a virtue/poison.

To deny this, I guess you would have to give some alternative account of what's characteristic of virtues, such that the defining feature would still be operant even in case of (e.g.) Nazis who have courage.

Hi! I've had your blog in my feed for a little whi...

2009-09-20T22:49:26.977-04:00

Hi! I've had your blog in my feed for a little while and was moved to comment by this post. I think I disagree with Foot here. I think courage is indeed still operating as a virtue when used by a murderer. It's worth reminding ourselves that bad people engaged in bad actions nevertheless have their virtues; it helps remind us of our common humanity. There's something to be admired about the courage and self-discipline of a Nazi who sacrificed himself for his cause, even though the cause itself was abhorrent. On utilitarian grounds, most of us would probably prefer that Nazis and other murderers be weak and spineless than courageous and disciplined - since that would lead to the failure of their cause, which would be a good thing for others. I don't see that point, however, as reason to deny that a Nazi who risks his life for his cause is exercising the virtue of courage. Just a thought.

Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Foot on Courageous Wrongdoers

Yeah, I used to be of much the same opinion, but I...

Hi! I've had your blog in my feed for a little whi...