What are the three classical approaches to moving a person towards good action, and what does each one work on?
Virtue ethics strengthens what you can be (character), consequentialist ethics shapes what you want (useful outcomes for all), and duty ethics shows what you shall do (obligations).
| Approach | German | Works on | The route to good action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virtue ethics | Tugendethik | Ability / character (Können) | From inner insight — you do good because of the kind of person you have become. Virtues: courage, bravery, prudence, justice … |
| Consequentialist / outcome ethics | Folgenethik | Volition (Wollen) | From considerations of usefulness and expected reward — you come to want useful goods not only for yourself but for everyone |
| Duty ethics / deontology | Pflichtenethik | Obligation (Sollen) | From avoiding punishment and seeking recognition in a community — you act so as to be respected as a good member of it |
The three-word summary that holds the whole thing together is Können – Wollen – Sollen: what I can (be), what I want, what I shall do.
It's worth being clear about what this table is and isn't. These are three mechanisms for producing good conduct, and they are not mutually exclusive — real people are moved by all three, and a well-designed institution uses all three. What separates them as theories is a sharper question, taken up separately: what makes an action good in the first place — the actor's character, the outcome, or the act itself?
Go deeper:
Ethics Unwrapped: Virtue Ethics — the character route, in one page.- Ethics Unwrapped: Consequentialism — the outcome route, in one page.
- Ethics Unwrapped: Deontology — the duty route, in one page — read all three together and the Können/Wollen/Sollen split clicks.