CONFIDENCE AND CRITIQUE ; MORAL OBJECTIVITY AND RELATIVITY OF IN VIRTUE ETHICS

道义伦理学和功利主义是典型的现代关怀。从普遍理性的角度来看，两者都是为了建立某种控制道德行为的原则。然而，现代伦理学所推论的原则带来了在实际道德问题上无休止的分歧的许多方面。此外，它们几乎没有证明在任何特定和实际情况下对认知或传导反应所需的任何有效性。因此，美德伦理学最近引起了我们的关注。美德伦理学认为，在特定的道德行为中，传统、习俗和具体比原则更重要。然而，恢复美德伦理可能会导致不加批判和顽固的保守主义。那么，在所谓的现代启蒙之后，如何可能争论美德伦理学的可能性呢？那么，道德的相对性和客观性是我们当前关注的问题，这是围绕以下几点展开的：1.人类“目的”(即人的真实目的或本质)的丧失，用现代伦理学取代了古代的美德。本研究表明，在康德之后，在这种情况下，美德也必须被道义论伦理学所包含。2.针对那些声称诸如“幸福”或“权利”这样的“薄概念”太抽象而不能解决任何实际问题的批评，估计的可能性是将现代伦理学重新定位在(内部)现实主义的舞台上，作为先验唯心主义，以整合美德伦理学和自由主义。3.受一种观点约束的内在现实主义可以超越其局限性，自我批评，而不是以任何外部观点，而是通过(在一个人内部)可以从一个人所参与的各种社区所带来的不同背景中获得的多个方面。

Deontological ethics and utilitarianism are of typical modern concern. From a viewpoint of universal rationality, both intended to establish some principle that controls moral conducts. The principles which modern ethics have deduced, however, brought about many aspects of interminable disagreements on practical moral issues. Furthermore they proved scarcely any effectiveness on cognitive or conductive response required on any specific and practical situation. For that reason, virtue ethics which estimates tradition, custom and concreteness as more important than principle in given moral conducts, has lately attracted our concern. Restoration of virtue ethics, however, might cause the uncritical and obstinate conservatism. How can it be possible, then, after so-called modern enlightenment, to argue on the possibility of the virtue ethics?Relativity and objectivity of morality, then, is our current concern ; which is argued along the points as follows :1.The loss of human "telos" (i.e.man's true end or essential nature) replaced the ancient virtues with the modern ethics. The present research shows that, following Kant, under such circumstances, virtues must be also contained by deontological ethics.2.Against the criticism which claims that such a "thin concepts" as "happiness" or "right" are too abstract to solve any practical problem, estimated possibilities are considered as to relocating modern ethics on the stage of (internal) realism as transcendental idealism, in order to integrate virtue ethics and liberalism.3.Internal realism bound by a viewpoint can go beyond its limitation and criticize itself, not by any external point of view, but by means of plural aspects that (within a person) can be obtained from different contexts brought by varieties of communities in which a person participate.