what are they called anyway? “virtue ethicists” seems too cerebral/theoretical… aretaics? aretaists?
This is one of those problems that everybody sees immediately but nobody can do anything about it without more effort than it’s worth. We’ve been called “virtue ethicists” for at least 30 years, and it’s sticking.
“Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics” seems like everybody involved is violating some sort of naming convention. It should be “Utilitarianism, Deontism, and Virtuism” or “Utility Ethics, Deontic Ethics, and Virtue Ethics”, or something.
I agree completely. There’s a phrase we use, “aretaic turn”, which describes the move towards consideration of virtue in all philosophical fields in the mid-to-late 20th century. I like it.
This is one of those problems that everybody sees immediately but nobody can do anything about it without more effort than it’s worth. We’ve been called “virtue ethicists” for at least 30 years, and it’s sticking.
“Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics” seems like everybody involved is violating some sort of naming convention. It should be “Utilitarianism, Deontism, and Virtuism” or “Utility Ethics, Deontic Ethics, and Virtue Ethics”, or something.
That’s a shame. I actually kind of fancied aretaic (used as a noun in the same sense as stoic/Stoic).
I agree completely. There’s a phrase we use, “aretaic turn”, which describes the move towards consideration of virtue in all philosophical fields in the mid-to-late 20th century. I like it.