Re-Examination of Virtue Ethics in Self Defence
Trivigno played a role in contributing significantly to the field of moral epistemology because he presents moralistic concerns in a way that redirects us to think about what it is we consider as moral or immoral. Self-defense is synonymous with the fight and flight response that happens when we are in danger. From a deontological perspective, it aims at safeguarding an individual’s rights in being able to defend themselves when in danger. From a virtue theory approach, however, the idea of using a handgun as a form of self-defense goes against what is necessary and violates the real nature of humanity. The use of a gun, in particular, casts doubt on eudaimonism that centers virtues to be important in human advancement. This paper aims to explore Trivigno’s argument and offer an understanding of it.
Trivigno’s case in part coincides with Aristotle understanding of ethics. As explained by Nafsika (2016), Aristotle argued that, as humans need to advance through reasoning and the life worth living being one characterized by logical reasoning. The use of the handgun as explained by Trivigno (2013) results into dehumanizing of the target and serves to undermine one’s capacity for strong concern. The very notion of dehumanization encourages poor reasoning meaning our ability to flourish and advance as human beings are under constraint in line with Aristotle’s thoughts. Without direction from traits such as compassion, sympathy, kindness then the quality of how we reason and live our life is in doubt.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
With the premise that distancing mechanisms enable killing through dehumanization of the target, this is right from an epistemological perspective. The idea behind this is that the use of a handgun encourages violence to the point that it leads to murder. In agreeing with Trivigno, using such a weapon, one compromises their ability to recognize the humanity in others because, at that particular time, the value of the perpetrator lessens and appear less human.
Still borrowing from Aristotle, the premise that when a thing has a function, the right of the thing becomes recognizable especially when it performs the work well. In this sense, man has a purpose and the right person is one who performs his function well (Nasfika, 2016). There is an insistence on the importance of reason. However, the use of handguns, as a form of self-defense appears to be lacking in reason. This is because, reason has its foundations on rationality and thinking before acting whereas, using a gun is more of an impulse. As Trivigno (2013), highlights the virtue ethical perspective expects that habitual gun carrying affects one’s character in that it encourages them to perpetuate violence.
The issue raises some questions for instance if we can justify gun carrying as a way to protect ourselves against criminals, in that we dehumanise the criminal and view them as less, deserving an equal share of violence. This means that even where individuals are trying to protect themselves, the motive may be misplaced in that the criminal does not want to harm the victim but is looking to steal their goods.
The idea that gun carrying predicts a considerable level of violence rests on the premise that having a gun encourages an individual to be an instigator of violence. The question of a gun as an ideal choice of weapon gives much to consider morally. If weapons of lesser harm are in utilisation, does it change the moral aspect of attacking human beings to defend themselves? It is important to understand the context of self-defense in detail. The idea rests on trying to reconstruct when it is appropriate to use a particular level of force on someone. For example, where a woman is trying to defend herself from rape is not self-defense advantageous from a utilitarian perspective in that the woman will act in her best interest to shield herself from harm. With the numerous consequences associated if the woman underwent the ordeal is not shielding her against the impending consequences better. As virtue ethicists, re-examining of the context and applicability of the methods used to defend one should be in play.
Human perception through time reveals itself as being highly subjective. With empiricists basing the framework of their knowledge on the said perception, in this case it may prove to be subjective and at times unreliable. This is because the perception of an individual as a criminal to the extent of causing the person harm may be fallible. What a person perceives to be a threat may not necessarily be a threat and where they are in possession of a handgun they may decide to act on their impulse while their senses have misled them.
Trivigno’s argument brings into question the processes of moral reasoning and its applicability in the context of self-defense. It raises the issue of propagating violence in that self-defense using weapons such as the handgun encourage the spread of violence. The interaction of the various thoughts, attitudes, and emotions in association with gun use as a form of self-defense support the development of more bad traits.
References
Nafsika, Atanassoulis (2016). Virtue Ethics: The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Web. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/
Trivigno, Franco (2013) Guns and Virtue: The Virtue Ethical Case against Gun Carrying . Public Affairs Quarterly , 27, p. 301.
