چکیده:
The virtue approach in moral education, which traces its origins back to Aristotle, has been revived in recent decades. In this article, the position of virtue ethics in contrast to adjustment and autonomy approaches is specified; then its naturalistic, communitarian, and objectivist foundations are presented, and the criteria for distinguishing it (especially its characterological nature) from other approaches are stated. Then, based on Aristotle's views, the superiority of explaining this approach regarding the issue of moral weakness is mentioned. Finally, skill acquisition, role modeling, and storytelling are mentioned as acceptable methods of virtue ethics, and the role of the teacher and the participation of home and school in moral education are emphasized.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Finally, skill acquisition, role modeling, and storytelling are mentioned as acceptable methods of virtue ethics, and the role of the teacher and the participation of home and school in moral education have been emphasized.
Although because the work of these individuals was simultaneous with the influential and impactful work of Kohlberg, it did not initially achieve much success in attracting the attention of interested individuals in this field; however, gradually, with the emergence of serious supporters who also showed interest in Aristotle's virtue-oriented view, today the fundamental theory of virtue ethics in philosophy and the practical approach of virtue-based moral education in pedagogy are recognized viewpoints and are considered a serious rival to other theories.
Additionally, David Carr introduces the proponents of the virtue approach as being influenced by contemporary post-analytic[2] theorists and communist social and moral theorists, and as being attracted to Aristotle.
Just as it has been referred to objectivistically in Aristotle's traditional virtue theory that virtues are real character qualities that prevent the harms and damaging consequences of evils, prevent, and even certain acts such as adultery have been introduced as absolutely immoral; David Carr, who is also a defender of Aristotle, believes that, contrary to the view of social relativists based on the idea that virtues are culture-dependent, one can identify a low-level vendor as a just and honorable person.
In the view of David Carr, if the difference between various approaches in moral education is not philosophical in terms of aims and methods, it cannot be considered a real difference.
(
, 
, 
)
