Introduction

Virtue ethics is a theory used to make moral decisions. It does not rely on religion, society or culture; it only depends on the individuals themselves. The main philosopher of Virtue Ethics is
Aristotle. His theory was originally introduced in ancient Greek times. Aristotle was a great believer in virtues and the meaning of virtue to him meant being able to fulfil one's functions. Virtue ethics is not so much interested in the question 'What should I do?' but rather in the question 'what sort of person should I become?' It has more to do with character and the nature of what it is to be human, than with the rights and wrongs of actions. Instead of concentrating on what is the right thing to do, virtue ethics asks
However the virtues stay the same in every community as well as the ultimate aim which is supreme happiness. Aristotle explains that all actions are done in order to reach an aim or goal. A series of actions are also leading towards an aim, for example getting up in to morning to go to work, leads to making money, leads to feeding our families, leads to going on holidays, etc. The utmost ultimate aim is to make people happy; everything is subordinate to the supreme good, which is happiness. This all-round well-being is known as eudaimonia.
Eudaimonia involves both being happy and also living well at the same time. (b) Moral relativist theories are too vague to be useful guides to decision making.

Relative morality is based on the theory that truth and rightness is different for different people or cultures. Moral relativism states that morality is dependent on the society. It states that there are no moral absolutes and that there is no definite right or wrong. In some societies certain behaviour is seen as morally right whereas in others the same behaviour is not acceptable. To be a relativist is to accept this principle and not to judge others for their behaviour. Moral relativists accept that whether a moral code exists because of tradition or religion, it may be needed to keep the society together.
Some people may argue that any moral code is better than no moral code however the absence of moral rules would be disastrous for any