This paper has a threefold aim. First, it seeks to unveil the circularity in Hursthouse’s account of Eudaimonist Virtue Ethics (EVE). To this end, I show that by framing eudaimonia as acting virtuously and virtues as stable dispositions of character needed to flourish, Hursthouse ultimately commits to a circular movement, where each concept is defined in terms of the other. In particular, virtues are not only seen as conducive to flourishing but also normatively constitutive of eudaimonia. I then demonstrate this circularity in action by discussing Rosalind McDougall’s application of EVE to reproductive ethics, particularly with respect to parents selecting for a deaf child. Second, I argue that this circularity stems from an individualistic conception of flourishing, which is rooted in a phenomenological interpretation of zoon politikon, leaving no intermediate space between means (i.e., virtues) and the end (i.e., eudaimonia). Third, I propose a relational conception of eudaimonia, defining it as acting virtuously with and for others. I further contend that the normative structure of philia can lead to a linear relationship between virtues and flourishing, providing an intermediate selection criterion for virtues.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enea Lombardi (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: