


































AQUINO VOLUME3 ISSUE 3 JUNE 2023


55

Abstract

This paper explores a threefold normative ethical approach to professional ethics. The 
prevalent moral failure among different professionals exposes the inadequacy of 
professional codes of conduct in arresting unethical behaviours among professionals. It 
is obvious that a professional code of conduct is necessary, but not sufficient without the 
moral growth, conviction and character of the professional. It was discovered that no 
particular normative ethical theory has the answer to the complex requirements of 
applied (professional) ethics. Unarguably, there is no single ethical approach that can 
claim to offer answers to all the challenges and questions arising in professional practice 
or to be exempted from objections and criticisms. The paper argues that an amalgamation 
of utilitarian ethical theory, Kantian duty ethics and Aristotelian virtue ethics provides 
the ethical framework for engendering viable professional ethics if the prescriptions and 
underlying assumptions of these normative ethical theories are followed by 
professionals. The prescriptions can be grouped into three main tenets: consequences, 
duties and virtues. It concludes that there are three key elements that a professional 
should observe to operate within acceptable ethical parameters, which are the greatest 
good, respect for human persons and moral virtues.

Keywords: Normative ethics, Consequences, Duties, Virtues, Professional ethics, 
Professionals.

INTRODUCTION
Interest in ethics, most especially within the professions, has grown considerably in 
recent decades because it has been found that good ethics is a crucial requirement of any 
profession. There exists much diversity of thought and little agreement regarding the 
most fundamental approaches to professional ethics. In the field of professional ethics, 
elucidations and applications of ethical theory before now have tended to focus on 
deontology and utilitarianism (Bowie 130-163; Hinman 176; Sumner 147-156; Clark 73; 
Freeman 72). Due to the discovery that neither deontology nor utilitarianism on its own is 
sufficient as an account of professional ethics, nor are they sufficient when they are taken 
together. In recent years, however, many scholars in this field have become dissatisfied 
with this simple bifurcation of ethics. For these reasons, some scholars have revived an 
interest in Aristotelian virtue ethics (Gardiner 291-316; Oakley and Cocking 74-94; 
Blackburn and McGhee 90-122; Solomon 317-339); still, others have explicated ethics of 
care and personal relationships (Noddlings 128-130; Hugman 67-84). 

CONSEQUENCES, DUTIES AND VIRTUES: A THREEFOLD NORMATIVE 
ETHICAL APPROACH TO PROFESSIONAL ETHICS.

ODUMAYAK OKPO, PH.D
DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF UYO, UYO, NIGERIA



 In as much as ethics is both personal and professional, and cannot be separated, this also 
suggests that ethics cannot be divorced from practice. At the same time, just as the 
application of knowledge and skill is situational, so too is ethics. There is no doubt that a 
great number of professionals face ethical problems in their professional life, as 
compared to non-professionals, mainly because professionals are trained to provide 
services to society that cannot be provided by non-professionals. This is a result of the two 
main features that characterize professionals: “firstly, special knowledge and training and 
secondly, that other people are rendered especially vulnerable or dependent in their 
relationship to the practice of the professional” (Fullinwider 73). Consequently, 
professional associations introduce codes of conduct to increase professional and ethical 
consciousness among professionals and their sense of ethical responsibility. But, the 
rampant moral failure among different professionals exposes the inadequacy of 
professional codes of conduct without strong personal professional ethics of the 
professional. 

However, no particular normative ethical theory has the answer to the complex 
requirements of applied (professional) ethics. Unarguably, there is no single ethical 
approach that can claim to offer answers to all the challenges and questions arising in 
professional practice or to be exempted from limitations, objections and criticisms. To 
this end, this present paper is an attempt to explore a threefold normative ethical approach 
to professional ethics. A threefold normative ethical approach offers new insights into the 
roles and responsibilities of professionals. 

CLARIFICATION OF TERMS: Ethics, Normative Ethics, Profession, 
Professional, and Professional Ethics
Ethics as a major branch of philosophy concerns itself with the morality of human 
conduct. It is concerned with studying what is good, right or praiseworthy within human 
interaction(s). Human conduct and actions form the core and subject matter of ethics or 
moral philosophy; the study of ethics starts with the study of human deeds and behaviour 
(Okpo 9). Ethics deals with the way things ought to be, the way human beings ought to 
behave and what humans ought to do. It helps people to decide what is right, praiseworthy 
and good or wrong, blameworthy and bad in any given situation. In other words, ethics is 
the study of standards for determining what behaviour or conduct is right and wrong, 
praiseworthy and blameworthy or good and bad.

It is important to note that it is not only ethics that is concerned with human behaviour and 
actions in society. Ethics is not the only discipline concerned with human behaviour and 
actions. Social sciences like sociology, psychology and anthropology, are also interested 
in human actions and conduct. Their interest and perspective of ethics is different from 
that of philosophical ethics. These social sciences tell us how human beings act and why 
human beings act as they do in society without actually making a value judgement.  
Philosophical ethics, on the other hand, is interested not in the description and 
explanation but in the evaluation of human conduct (Randall and Buchler 257). This 
suggests that philosophical ethics is both evaluative and prescriptive in nature. 
Philosophical ethics prescribes whether an action is right or wrong, and whether certain 

56

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



conduct is justifiable or not. It deals with the way things ought to be, the way human 
beings ought to behave and what human beings ought to do. Its major interests include the 
nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human actions and conduct can be 
judged right or wrong.  Hence, the study of ethics begins with the study of human action. 
Without an anchor in human action, ethics loses its meaning and its value to decision-
makers. Concerning professionals, Okpo avers that “ethics is about who professionals are 
– their strength of character and what they do, their deeds and conduct” (10). 

Normative ethics as a branch of ethics is concerned with norms, standards or principles by 
which human actions are to be good or bad, praiseworthy or blameworthy, and right or 
wrong. The word 'normative' denotes norms, or standards, of judgement. It studies 
principles about how human beings ought to live and seeks norms about what is right or 
wrong, virtuous, or just. It asks questions like: what principle ought we to live by? What 
are the basic principles of right and wrong actions? What are our fundamental moral 
duties? What makes the right actions right? Which character traits count as virtues or 
vices and why? The three traditional normative ethical theories include 
consequentialism, deontology and virtue ethics. These normative ethical theories shall be 
discussed in the subsequent section.

A profession, according to Umerah citing Connelly and Clandinin, is characterized 
by thirteen characteristics:

i. a high level of education and training based on a unique and specialized body of 
knowledge;

ii. requires activities that are predominantly intellectual with members possessing 
specialized exoteric knowledge;

iii. a strong ideal of public service with an enforced professional code of conduct and 
high levels of respect from the public at large;

iv. registration and regulation by the professional body;
v. trusted to act in the client's best interest within a framework of accountability;
vi. have ethical principles;
vii. an autonomous Association;
viii. members should show high priority to service as opposed to personal gain;
ix.  should demand continuous in-service growth and provide members opportunities 

for that;
x. a supportive working environment;
xi. similar levels of compensation as to other professions;
xii. it should be an occupation that affords its practitioners permanent membership in 

a life career;
xiii. the spirit of service to God and humanity (42 – 43).

 It is clear from the above characteristics of a profession that teaching, medicine, banking, 
accounting, nursing, pharmacy, engineering, and law are considered professions among 
many others.

57

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           



The term 'professional', according to Olu-Owolabi, has “three important defining 
features: (i) expertise, as a result of long years of training (ii) dependency of the rest of the 
society on this group of people (iii) the moral obligations that the professionals owe to the 
rest of the society by protecting the interests and rights of their clients” (68).  This 
suggests that a professional is an expert in a field of human endeavour that most clients 
know little about. So, clients and the public at large rely on the knowledge, expertise, and 
honesty of the professional. There is a correlation between a professional's moral 
responsibility and his/her professional calling. The moral responsibility associated with a 
professional calling makes professions differ from mere jobs. Professionals are expected 
to commit themselves forever toward serving - the interest of their clients and public 
interest - a goal beyond their self-interest. Many of the ethical issues, problems and 
dilemmas that arise in the world of profession emanate from this expectation. Hence, the 
moral responsibility associated with a professional calling is the main component of a 
profession and the essential foundation for professional ethics. 

Professional ethics belongs to the area of philosophical ethics known as applied ethics. 
Professional ethics, according to Olu-Owolabi, refers to “the norms and duties that ought 
to moderate professional activities in such a way that the conduct of professionals is 
carried out not for personal gains, but in the overall interest of a community in particular 
and humanity in general” (67). This implies that professional ethics is concerned with the 
ethical principles of various professions and how these principles affect the behaviours of 
professionals and their relationship with the general public. Professional ethics is a set of 
moral standards that depict the professional conduct that is expected in all fields of human 
endeavour. It explores the obligations of individuals within the perspective of their 
professional lives. One principal concern is with the kinds of obligations and 
responsibilities that professionals (journalists, teachers, physicians, engineers, ministers, 
public administrators, accountants and managers, to mention but few) have to their 
various stakeholders: clients, employers, employees, professional colleagues, other 
professionals and the society. 

Professional ethics is also interested in the moral conduct and guidelines regulating the 
profession and its members. This area of ethical study examines moral issues, problems, 
conflicts of interest, and social responsibility of the individual professionals as well as the 
profession itself in the light of moral principles, including duty and obligation. It is 
important to note that an ethical issue or dilemma is simply a situation or problem that 
needs an individual or organization to choose between alternatives that must be appraised 
as right or wrong, moral or immoral, and ethical or unethical. Moreover, professional 
ethics do not only provide standards that regulate the relationships between professionals 
and clients, but they also define norms regulating the professional's responsibility to 
colleagues and the public in general. It also raises central questions that contain ethical 
issues, problems and dilemmas that arise in the world of profession. Let us at this juncture 
examine the three major normative ethical theories that provide norms, standards and 
principles that regulate human conduct. 

58

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



NORMATIVE ETHICAL THEORIES: CONSEQUENTIALISM, 
DEONTOLOGY AND VIRTUE ETHICS

As mentioned in the preceding section, professional ethics belongs to the area of 
philosophical ethics known as applied ethics. In applied ethics, moral philosophers have 
to make use of the insights derived from meta-ethics and normative ethics in addressing 
specific ethical issues and cases. Consequently, applied ethics is the application of ethical 
theories and principles to particular moral dilemmas, issues or cases. The purpose of a 
normative ethical theory is to be action-guiding, and the actions of a professional cannot 
be rationally guided by the information he/she does not have and cannot be expected to 
have. In philosophical ethics, three major normative ethical theories attempt to set rules 
that regulate human conduct in society. These theories focus on a set of standards and 
principles or a set of moral character traits that human beings are expected to possess. 
These normative ethical theories include consequentialism, deontological and virtue 
ethics. The goal of this section is to examine these three normative ethical theories and an 
attempt will be made to identify the nature, strengths and weaknesses of each of these 
theories.

Consequentialism
The term 'consequentialism' is used to classify a common way of moral reasoning about 
right and wrong actions of a particular set of related ethical theories. The 
consequentialism normative ethical theory is also referred to as 'teleological theory'. 
What then is consequentialism or teleological theory? Consequentialist normative ethical 
theories maintain that it is the results or consequences of actions that determine the 
rightness or wrongness of such actions. In other words, a moral agent action is right or 
wrong because, and only because, of the action's results or consequences. Here, the 
concern is about morally right or wrong conduct. Consequentialists, unlike deontologists, 
do not ask whether a particular practice is right or wrong but whether it will lead to 
positive results. What matter to the consequentialists is nothing but the result or 
consequence of our action.

Consequentialism, according to Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell, “refers to moral 
philosophies in which an act is considered morally right or acceptable if it produces some 
desired result such as pleasure, knowledge, career growth, the realization of self-interest, 
utility, wealth, or even fame” (155). Similarly, Rossouw clearly explains the nature of the 
consequentialism theory thus:
                        Consequence-oriented theories emphasize that we should look at the 

possible consequences or practical implications of our intended actions to 
determine whether an action is right or wrong. If the bad consequences 
outweigh the good ones, the proposed action should be abandoned and it 
should be regarded as morally wrong. Should the good consequence 
outweigh the bad ones, however, the proposed action can be considered 
morally permissible (15-16).

This entails that it is the goodness or badness of an action's consequences that determine 
its rightness or wrongness. For the consequentialists, the moral worth of conduct is 
determined by its consequences. Put differently, an action is morally right if, and only if, 

59

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           



among the actions that the moral agent could perform, there is no other action, the 
outcome of which has a greater expected value. To act in any other way is wrong. 

It should be noted that different consequentialist normative ethical theories associate the 
rightness or wrongness of actions with the goodness or badness of their results in different 
ways. Many normative ethical theories belong to this ethical theory family in 
philosophical ethics. For this paper, we shall discuss one major version of 
consequentialism: utilitarianism. 

Utilitarianism as an ethical theory is traceable to Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) and John 
Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873). These two nineteenth-century British Philosophers are 
credited with introducing utilitarianism into the mainstream of modern Western ethical 
thought. Their normative ethical theories are based on the principle of utility, the 
principle of the greatest good, or the principle of the greatest happiness. According to 
utilitarianism, utility is the moral standard; it is the parameter or yardstick by which good 
actions are distinguished from bad actions. By utility, the utilitarian means benefit, 
advantage, pleasure, good or happiness (Bentham 18; Omoregbe 233). 

Mill, in his book – On Liberty and Utilitarianism, defines utilitarianism as:
               The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility or the Greatest 

Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to 
promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By 
happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain 
and the privation of pleasure (118).

This means that those actions which produce or tend to produce pleasure are good while 
those that produce or tend to produce pain are bad. It is obvious that utilitarianism is 
concerned with consequences, but the utilitarian pursues the greatest good for the greatest 
number of persons that would be affected by a decision. 

It is important to note that when the utilitarian principle asserts that the right action is the 
one that produces more utility than any other possible action, it does not mean that the 
right action is the one that produces the most utility for the moral agent. Rather, an action 
is right if it produces the most utility for every person affected by the action, including the 
moral agent (Velasquez 85). Hence, utilitarianism is not egoism (ethical egoism is also a 
consequentialism ethical theory that holds that the moral agent ought to do what is in 
his/her self-interest). The purpose of ethics for the utilitarian is to promote human welfare 
by minimizing harm and maximizing the good for the greatest number of people.

There are two positions of utilitarianism: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act-
utilitarianism maintains that the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined only 
based on the consequences of the action. According to this position, individual actions are 
to be judged right or wrong if their consequences tend to produce the greatest happiness 
for the greatest number of people. Thus act- utilitarianism only considers the 
consequence of an action and not the nature of the act itself. 

60

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



Rule-utilitarianism, on the other hand, maintains that an action is right if it is in agreement 
with a rule of conduct that has been validated by the principle of utility, and wrong, if 
otherwise. Rule-utilitarianism claims that it is never reasonable in any circumstances to 
violate a rule and the general observance of which produces the greatest possible good to 
the greatest number of people. Hence, while act-utilitarianism is preoccupied with 
specific actions, rule-utilitarianism is preoccupied with rules.

However, all versions of utilitarianism have one thing in common: it is the consequence 
of an action that decides the rightness or wrongness of that action and not the nature of the 
act itself. Rather than looking at the intention behind the act, one must explore the best 
outcome for the greatest number of people.

At the level of business organization, the greatest possible good to all the stakeholders 
would be situated both in profit and inefficient business behaviour. However, it is when 
the consequence, such as profit maximization, becomes the only focus of business 
behaviour that a utilitarian approach may become difficult and harm the rights of others. 
In the same vein, when an action is taken by a professional to seek the good of the wider 
society or group, that professional is utilitarian.

For instance, professional journalist or reporter who uses deception to uncover social ills 
often appeal to the principle of utility on the ground that, in the long run, they are 
accomplishing some moral good for the public they serve. In other words, the positive 
consequences for society justify the devious means of gathering information.

The criterion of quality in the utilitarian framework poses so many difficulties, it can be 
argued that utilitarianism justifies – and perhaps even demands – acts which seem to us to 
be unjust or immoral. Another way of expressing this objection to utilitarianism is to 
claim that people have rights which ought not to be violated even when doing so results in 
a greater total of good. Utilitarianism is incapable of respecting such rights because they 
can always be overridden in favour of an act or rule which maximizes total good.

It seems to be true that the consequences of action play a significant part in deciding 
whether that action is right or wrong. But utilitarianism's failure to take into account 
rights suggests that the rightness of an action does not depend solely upon its 
consequences – for us or others. Other non-consequentialist factors may also have a 
bearing on the moral quality of actions. For an approach which does take such factors into 
account, we turn to the deontology normative ethical theories.

Deontology
Deontology is derived from the Greek word deon meaning “duty”. Deontology considers 
duty, or doing what is right for its own sake, as the basis of morality. Deontology sees the 
rightness or wrongness of an action in terms of a duty or obligation to respect the right and 
values of people. This duty-based normative ethical theory asserts that the consequences 
of an action have nothing to do with whether the action is right or wrong; it is, thus, non-

61

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           



consequentialism. If consequentialism asks us to think through the consequences of the 
act, deontology or non-consequentialism asks us to think through the act, without 
thinking about its consequences. According to deontology or non-consequentialism, 
some types of actions are forbidden, or necessary, regardless of their consequences.

Deontology, according to Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell, is seen as a “moral philosophy 
that focuses on the rights of individuals and the intentions associated with a particular 
behaviour rather than on its consequences” (158). This denotes that deontological 
theories are based on the philosophy that judging an action of an individual as morally 
right or wrong should not depend on the consequences of the action but on the intentions 
of the moral agent. Put differently, Deontology as a normative ethical theory does not look 
chiefly at the consequences of actions, but examines a situation for the essential moral 
worth of the intention of act, or rightness or wrongness of the act. Unlike 
consequentialism, deontologists or non-consequentialists argue that certain behaviours 
are fundamentally wrong, even if these behaviours bring about greater benefits to society.  
For instance, deontologists would consider it wrong to commit a serious injustice against 
an individual, no matter how much greater social utility might result from doing so 
because such an action would be violating the moral principle of respect for persons. 
Hence, to decide whether a particular behaviour is morally right, deontologists look for 
consistency in moral principles, not consequences. One of the outstanding deontologists 
is Immanuel Kant who believes that respecting the individual and motive matters more 
than results or consequences in moral deliberations.

Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) was the most famous deontologist in the history of moral 
philosophy. It should be noted that Kantianism is identified with an idea put forward by 
Kant to the effect that the only thing that is good in all circumstances is goodwill. Unlike 
the utilitarians, Kant maintains that one ought to perform right actions not because they 
will produce good results, but because it is our duty as moral agents to do so. His moral 
philosophy is based on three major notions: his notion of goodwill, his notion of duty and 
his notion of the categorical imperative. 

Kant speaking about goodwill maintains that nothing is good in itself except goodwill. 
Kant meant that goodwill is the only thing that is good without qualifications; other things 
regarded as good are not categorically good because their goodness can be bad when 
misused. What then is goodwill? He sees goodwill as the human ability to act according to 
the moral law or as a will that acts for the sake of duty. Humans are expected to act in 
conformity with moral laws or principles regardless of personal interests or 
consequences. 

Kant makes a distinction between two types of duties: “acting for the sake of duty” and 
“acting according to duty”. While he considers the former as having a moral worth, he 
considers the latter as having no moral worth. For him, acting for the sake of duty is the 
only way that one's action can be said to have moral worth. What does it mean to act for the 
sake of duty and according to duty? To act for the sake of duty, Kant says, is “to act, not 
because one hopes to gain anything from the action, not because one just feels like doing it 

62

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



or because one has a natural inclination to doing such things, but purely out of reverence 
for the moral law” (Omoregbe 220). This implies that when one is said to act for the sake 
of duty, one is simply acting according to the dictate of the moral law.  To act according to 
duty, on the other hand, Kant asserts, is “to act out of prudent considerations for one's 
interest” (Omoregbe 220). 

It should be noted that Kant never classified such actions as bad, but that those actions 
have no moral worth, that is, they are not morally praiseworthy. For instance, imagine that 
you are walking along the road with your friend. You pass a beggar asking for help on the 
street. And your friend gave the beggar some money out of empathy. For Kant, your 
friend's action has no moral worth because what is moving him to give money is empathy 
rather than duty. He is acting by duty, not for the sake of duty. In other words, your friend is 
not acting out of respect for the moral law.

Kant makes a distinction between hypothetical imperative and categorical imperative. A 
hypothetical imperative is a conditional imperative which requires an individual to do 
something which is a means to an end. On the other hand, a categorical imperative is an 
unconditional imperative. Categorical imperative enjoins actions not as means to ends 
but as good in themselves. Hence, moral commands are categorical imperatives; they are 
unconditional. The categorical imperative of Kant has two formulations.

For Kant, the criterion for distinguishing right from wrong actions is the principle of 
universalization. If one wants to know whether the action he intends to perform is morally 
right or wrong, he should look at the action's underlying principle (i.e., the maxim) and 
universalize it. In Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant asserts that “I ought 
never to act in such a way that I could not also will that my maxim should be a universal 
law” (18). Hence, one of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative is “act on the 
maxim which you can will to be a universal law.” This maxim could be interpreted to 
mean that before a professional performs a particular action, he/she should ask 
himself/herself whether he/she would consider it desirable for everyone in a similar 
situation as his/her to perform a similar action. If the answer is in the affirmative, then his 
action is morally right, otherwise, it is morally wrong.

If a professional marketer is contemplating a deceptive marketing strategy to market or 
sell his/her product, for instance, he/she must be willing to endorse a world in which all 
people lie when it seems to their advantage to do so. If everyone were permitted to lie, one 
would never be able to tell if a person is lying or telling the truth. Under such situations, 
the very practice of truth-telling is weakened and lying ceases to be profitable. 

Kant postulates a second formulation of the categorical imperative that he claims is 
similar to the first version. In the second formulation, Kant focuses his attention on the 
rights of human beings. Kant opines that “act so that you treat humanity, whether in your 
person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only” (46). Both 
egoism and utilitarianism (consequentialists) seem to violate this principle. For the 
egoist, others have value only insofar as they promote the egoist's self-interest; for the 
utilitarian, every person appears to be a means for the maximization of good.

63

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           



However, Kant acknowledges that we might often use others as means to an end, as we 
do, for instance, when we employ them to do a job for us. But he underscores that they 
also have a value in and of themselves which we must respect. For this reason, a Kantian 
would take strong exception to the view that employees are to be treated like mere tools in 
the production process. Human labour should never be treated like machinery, industrial 
plants and capital solely by economic laws for profit maximization. Any economic 
system that fails to acknowledge this distinction between human beings and other non-
human factors of production is morally deficient (Beauchamp and Bowie 21). The 
summary of the categorical imperative is to act out of duty in obedience to the categorical 
imperative is for Kant what it means to be moral.

One advantage of Kant's categorical imperative is that it encourages the furtherance of a 
mutual relationship between the professional and his/her clients or customers. The 
principle discourages the professional from formulating maxims that would amount to 
breaching the principles of veracity and mutual trust embedded in the code of ethics for 
the different professions. By his categorical imperative formulation, Kant has made it 
abundantly clear that lying is bad. It constitutes a breach of trust.

Even though it offers some meaningful advantages over consequentialism, Kant's theory 
is not without its difficulties. It is occasionally difficult to apply general principles to 
particular unusual circumstances. It can also be argued that moral duties cannot be 
separated from the consequences of fulfilling those obligations. For instance, the reason 
that the duty, to tell the truth, is such a fundamental principle is that truth-telling produces 
good consequences for society. Another criticism often directed at Kant is that although 
he provides us with a rational basis for rights and duties. He fails to take into 
consideration that duties can conflict, and he also fails to suggest a framework for 
resolving such conflicts. Professionals often feel torn between their duty to their 
employers and their duty to society at large.

Despite its shortcomings, deontology does have some advantages. First, concrete rules 
that provide for few exceptions take some of the pressure off the moral agents to predict 
the consequences of their actions. There is a duty to act according to the rules, regardless 
of the outcome. Second, there is more predictability in deontology, and one who follows 
these ideas consistently is likely to be regarded as a truthful person. 

Virtue Ethics
Although consequentialism and deontology theories differ in many respects, they have 
one thing in common: they are concerned with principles and standards for evaluating the 
rightness and wrongness of actions. They focus on what the moral agent should do, not on 
the kind of person the moral agent ought to be, that is, they ignore the character of the 
moral agent who acts. While consequentialists and deontologists are concerned about 
what humans morally ought to do and are prohibited from doing. These ethical theories 
are invented to answer the question “What should I do?” Virtue ethics, on the other hand, 
is mainly concerned with the kinds of character humans should develop. There is a much 
greater emphasis on “character traits” and “type of person want should be”, than on 

64

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



duties, obligations, rules, and rights. Hence, the primary ethical question for virtue ethics 
is: “What should I be?” 

Virtue ethics as a normative ethical theory is more often than not associated with the 
Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 B.C.E), mainly drawn from his Nichomachean 
Ethics. It is an approach in normative ethics that underscores the virtues or moral 
character of the moral agent, in contrast to the approach that underscores the 
consequences of actions of the moral agent (consequentialism) or that underscores duties 
or rules (deontology). Deontologists and consequentialist theories do more, of course, 
than provide a foundation for advice on moral decisions. They offer an understanding of 
what ethics is concerned with. In Kantian ethics, this is first and foremost principles, and 
also respect for rational beings (including oneself as a rational being). In consequentialist 
theories, the concern is with values that can be attained or missed. The emphasis of these 
theories is on the evaluation of actions, and the rules and principles which tell us which 
actions to perform. 

Virtue ethics, on the other hand, does offer a different understanding of what ethics is 
concerned with. It is thought to provide a much better understanding of humans' moral 
lives: what it is humans strive to be in pursuing the moral life and why the moral life is 
important to humans (Waluchow 202). Virtue ethicists are less concerned with individual 
cases and choices than with what it is to be a good person, an individual who sustains a 
moral compass based on solid moral values. They would say that judging any action in 
isolation will miss the point, as we ought to be looking at the person's whole life, all things 
considered. Hence, virtue ethics as a normative ethical theory emphasizes the moral 
agent's character and virtues rather than duties and rules, or the consequences of actions. 
Many virtue ethicists have criticized the notion that actions are the basic subject matter of 
ethics. Ethics, they have argued, should look not only at the kinds of actions a moral agent 
ought to perform, but ought to pay attention to the kind of person a moral agent should be. 
A more suitable approach to ethics, according to these virtue ethicists, would take the 
virtues such as honesty, courage, temperance, integrity, compassion, and self-control and 
the vices such as dishonesty, ruthlessness, greed, lack of integrity, cowardliness as the 
fundamental starting points for ethical reasoning (Velasquez 134). To this end, virtue 
ethics theories deal with such questions as: “How should I live?”, “What is the good life?” 
and “What should I be?”

It should be noted at this point that there are many accounts of virtue ethics in the West, 
apart from Aristotle's account. Other accounts include Plato's, the Stoics', Aquinas', 
Hume's and Nietzsche's accounts of virtue ethics. Moreover, there are different forms of 
virtue ethical theories: eudaimonist virtue ethics, agent-based virtue ethics and the ethics 
of care among others. Our concern in this paper is with Aristotle's eudaimonist virtue 
ethics. 

Aristotle was a teleologist, a term associated with, but not to be mistaken with, the 
description “teleological” as applied to normative ethical theories such as Egoism and 
Utilitarianism. Aristotle was a teleologist because he claimed that all human activities are 
directed towards the accomplishment of certain ends or goals. His ethics contains certain 

65

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           



statements about the purpose of human beings, their place in society, and what is good for 
them. The Greek term telos refers to the purpose, goal or end of something. Aristotle 
considered happiness to be the end toward which all actions are directed. It is an end in 
itself and never a means to something else. Happiness, in the words of Aristotle, “being 
found to be something final and self-sufficient, is the end at which all actions aim” (12). 
This entails that happiness is the end which is sought for its own sake, and whatever an 
individual seeks as an end or as a good, he/she seeks it as a means to happiness. All 
humans seek happiness, but there is only one way to accomplish it, and that is through 
morality. Hence, happiness becomes a moral standard for Aristotle.

The view that makes happiness the standard of morality is known as eudaimonism. It is 
derived from the Greek word eudaimonia meaning “happiness” or “flourishing” or 
“fulfilment”. This ethical doctrine asserts that happiness is the basic reason for morality. 
The aim of all human actions, according to this doctrine, is to produce happiness, and 
actions are judged as good or right if they produce happiness, while actions that do not 
produce happiness are said to be bad. 

For Aristotle, the highest good is happiness, the end of all human actions. The good life 
for man, according to him, is happiness and so men ought to behave to achieve happiness 
(Popkin and Stroll 7). But what then is happiness? Aristotle sees happiness as an activity 
of the soul in conformity with virtue (Aristotle 22). Aristotle claims that the soul consists 
of two parts: one irrational and the other capable of reason, that is, rational (23). Virtues, 
according to Aristotle, are distinguished in conformity with this division of the soul. To 
this end, there are two types of virtues, namely intellectual virtues (wisdom or 
intelligence and prudence) and moral virtues (liberality and temperance). In speaking of a 
person's moral character, we do not describe that person as wise or knowledgeable, but as 
gentle or self-disciplined. We praise a wise person for his/her character or dispositions, 
and praiseworthy character or dispositions are the virtues (Aristotle 24).

Intellectual virtue is the result of teaching and for that reason requires experience and 
time to be cultivated. What constitutes intellectual virtues, according to Aristotle, include 
scientific knowledge, art, practical wisdom, intuitive reason, theoretical wisdom, sound 
deliberation, understanding and judgement (Omoregbe 164). Moral virtues, on the other 
hand, include justice, temperance, liberality, courage, gentleness, wittiness, and 
truthfulness among others. Aristotle is of the view that virtue lies between two extremes. 
Virtue is a mean between excess and defect. This is known as the doctrine of the 'golden 
mean'. For instance, courage is a mean between cowardice and recklessness; self-control 
is a mean between insensitivity and self-indulgence, and so on. These extremes 
correspond with particular vices associated with character. These moral virtues are the 
product of habit. An individual becomes virtuous by doing virtuous acts. For instance, 
you are courageous by performing acts of courage.

For a better understanding of Aristotle's moral virtues, we present a table of virtues and 
vices below (The Nicomachean Ethics 32):

66

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



Class of action or 
feeling 

Excess (vice) Mean Deficiency (vice) 

fear and confidence rashness courage Cowardice 

pleasure and pain profligacy temperance Insensitivity 

giving and getting 
small amounts of 
money 

prodigality liberality Meanness 

giving and getting 
large amounts of 
money 

vulgarity magnificence Paltriness 

major honour and 
dishonour 

vanity Greatness of soul Smallness of soul 

minor honour and 
dishonour 

ambitiousness Proper ambition Unambitiousness 

Anger irascibility gentleness Spiritlessness 

truthfulness about 
one’s own merits 

boastfulness truthfulness Self-depreciation 

pleasantness in social 
amusement 

buffoonery wittiness Boorishness 

pleasantness in social 
conduct 

obsequiousness friendliness Surliness 

Shame bashfulness modesty Shamelessness 

pleasure in others’ 
misfortunes 

envy Righteous 
indignation 

Malice 

 

The above list will give us some idea of what Aristotle means by the mean between two 
extremes. The virtue of courage, for instance, lies between the vices of rashness and 
cowardice. The coward has too much fear or fear when he/she should have none. The rash 
person has too little fear and excessive confidence. The courageous person has the right 
amount. While courage is the virtue related to the emotions of fear and confidence, 
gentleness is the virtue related to anger. A person who gets angry too quickly will be 
irascible; a person who never gets angry, even when he/she should, is spiritless. The 
virtuous person will get angry when he/she should, but not excessively and not contrary to 
reason. Aristotle calls the virtue of appropriate anger gentleness.

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           

67



The question that is begging for an answer at this point is: how does an individual acquire 
a virtue? An individual acquires a virtue by practising virtue just as an individual becomes 
a swimmer in no other way than by practising swimming continually and ceaselessly until 
it becomes a habit in him/her. Equally, virtue is acquired in no other way than by 
practising it continually and ceaselessly until it becomes a habit, second nature 
(Omoregbe 165). Aristotle believed that moral virtues should be acquired at a tender age, 
that is, from one's youth. It is difficult if not impossible to develop moral virtues in 
adulthood; a bad or good habit is difficult to acquire at a certain age. 

It is a truism that an individual cannot become outstanding at anything worthwhile 
suddenly. To be outstanding in any worthwhile activity an individual will need both effort 
and consistent training for some time. Aristotle maintains that the same is true for persons 
attempting to develop their virtuous character traits in an attempt to live the good life; an 
individual cannot simply acquire these traits by decision, rather he/she must live these 
traits to develop them (Dimmock and Fisher 54). Hence, developing and cultivating a 
moral character is something that happens through practice and habitual action. 

What then is the place of practical wisdom in Aristotle's ethics? Practical wisdom is a 
reaction to how an individual can arrive at a balance between two extremes in any given 
situation. Thus, practical wisdom can be seen as the moral insight of a virtuous person by 
which the right course of action in any given situation can be known; only a virtuous 
person can be a man/woman of practical wisdom and he/she acquires and develops it 
through experience (Omoregbe 166). Consequently, practical wisdom enables an 
individual to correctly put his/her virtuous character into practice. In other words, 
practical wisdom is a necessary virtuous disposition to cultivate as without the rule of 
practical wisdom it may be problematic to truly practice actions that are self-controlled 
rather than self-indulgent, or just rather than unjust. Hence, virtue is not simply an isolated 
action but a habit of acting well. For an action to be virtuous an individual must do it 
deliberately, knowing what he/she is doing, and doing it because it is a noble action. While 
moral virtues position an individual to behave correctly, it is necessary also to have the 
right intellectual (like practical wisdom) to reason properly about how to behave in a 
particular situation.

Aristotle regarded justice as the highest virtue and described it as fairness and lawfulness. 
He differentiated between two kinds of justice: universal justice and particular justice. 
Universal justice is practically the same as virtue - the person who possesses justice can 
make use of it not only by himself/herself but also when relating with others, while 
particular justice is of two kinds namely, distributive justice and remedial justice. 
Distributive justice demands that material goods should be distributed fairly according to 
merit, while remedial justice demands fairness in human transactions (Omoregbe 166).

Aristotle's virtue ethics is not without its limitations and objections. A common objection 
to Aristotelian virtue ethics is based on a concern regarding 'unclear guidance' for moral 
agents. It has been “accused of being a theory, not of helpful moral guidance, but of 
unhelpful and non-specific moral platitudes” (Dimmock and Fisher 58). Another 
objection has to do with his concept of happiness. For him, to achieve happiness, human 

68

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



beings must act in accordance with the mean, that is, act moderately. But the question is: 
how can individuals apply the doctrine of the mean to the virtues of truth and honesty? 
Happiness therefore cannot solely be the moral standard because there are areas where 
Aristotle's doctrine of the mean would be difficult, if not impossible, to apply (Okpo, 
Value Theory 30). 

A THREEFOLD NORMATIVE ETHICAL APPROACH 
TO PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

In the preceding section, we discussed the nature, strengths and weaknesses of the three 
traditional normative ethical theories. It is a truism that each of them has some positive 
aspects to contribute to regulating the behaviour of individuals in society. In this section, 
our focus is to explore a threefold normative ethical approach to professional ethics, that 
is, a complementary approach to professional ethics. From the clarification of terms 
discussed earlier, it is obvious that the terms profession and professional have normative 
meanings: training, skill and commitment to a set of norms. Given the normative 
implications of these two terms profession and professional, professional associations 
and institutions introduce professional codes of ethics to regulate the conduct of their 
members. These associations and institutions exist to regulate professional practice, grant 
admission, and disciplinary responsibility, safeguard the interest of clients, public 
interest, and also the best interest of the profession itself. 

Professional associations or institutions introduce their members to the values and norms 
of a specific profession and endeavour to mould their character and personality traits that 
are necessary to the profession through codes of conduct. Ethical codes and statements of 
ethical principles can be read as sets of rules. However, merely following a set of ethical 
rules is not necessarily to act ethically. To act ethically professionals, need to be motivated 
by sincere intentions and the inculcation of strong ethical convictions. Moreover, one 
major criterion of any profession is service to humanity. Every profession's task is to 
provide socially important services, and thus satisfy important social needs, then 
fulfilling this task will only be possible if the professionals will comply with three groups 
of norms: competence, conscientiousness and trust (Moore 13-15).  Trust stands out 
among these three groups of norms. Trust is necessary in any relationship between 
members of society and the more trust there is between individuals, the better the society 
functions. The foundation of trust is the virtue of honesty and integrity expected of a 
professional because a hallmark of the virtue of any profession is that its members act with 
integrity (Okpo 16). To this end, every professional association has trust (honesty and 
integrity) at the root of its professional codes of conduct.

Many professional codes of conduct of different professions cover areas like a conflict of 
interest, integrity, customer privacy, confidentiality, abuse of trust, public safety, offer, 
and acceptance of gratification among others. One major purpose of codes of conduct is to 
increase professional and ethical consciousness among professionals and their sense of 
ethical responsibility.  Adeyanju, citing McDowell, asserts that “ethical codes enable 
definition of the limits of what constitutes acceptable or unacceptable behaviour, and 
provide a mechanism for communicating ethics policy” (78). This suggests that codes of 
conduct are meant to guide professionals in making more informed ethical choices. 

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           

69



Moreover, professional codes of conduct provide an overall declaration of ethical values 
and remind professionals in the profession that ethical conduct is a crucial part of their 
job. Hence, the codes serve as reminders about peculiar professional responsibilities and 
obligations.  The question that comes to mind is: can the professional codes of conduct 
ensure ethical behaviour without the professional's moral conviction and character? It is 
quite disappointing to know that despite the codes of conduct there still exist many 
unethical practices and behaviours that are prevalent among the different professions. In 
the course of performing their professional duties to meet up with the professional-client 
relationship demands, as well as the expectations of their employers and society at large, 
professionals are confronted with many ethical issues, dilemmas, and problems. 

The prevalent moral failure among different professionals shows the limitation of 
professional codes of conduct in arresting unethical behaviours among professionals. It is 
obvious that a professional code of conduct is necessary, but not sufficient without the 
moral growth, conviction and character of the professional. Codes could be said to have a 
low degree of exactness; creating a code to cover every ethical issue, problem and 
dilemma that arises in the world of the profession is an ineffective task since it would be 
difficult, if not impossible, to articulate codes that would apply to every situation faced in 
the workplace. Moral growth emanates from choice, man's internal disposition and 
personal conviction; it is not a function of conformity to codes of conduct alone. For this 
reason, a completely dishonest professional will not be persuaded to mend his/her ways 
only by an ethical code of conduct, instead, he/she will find a way around the codes. 
Consequently, it is the view of this paper that the ethical foundation of professional ethics 
needs to be reformed on three grounds based on the three normative ethical theories 
discussed in the preceding section: greatest good (public good), human dignity (respect 
for the human person) and moral virtues. 

The notion of the greatest good or public good as an ethical foundation of professional 
ethics can be understood given the fact that human beings do not exist in isolation from 
their fellow human beings in society. Greatest good means everything good to more than 
one individual, that is public good. Professionals are expected to recognise the nature and 
importance of their relationships with other members of society: this is one of the 
necessary parameters required for a professional status of a profession. Fundamental 
components of this relationship “are the professional's desire to do good for the client and 
to tailor the “good” to the particular needs of the client and the public at large” (Blackburn 
and McGhee 91). And, one major dimension that characterizes professionals is 
“performance for the public good” (Fullinwider 73). This means that professionals are 
required to use their skills and training for the service of the public good, as their means to 
achieve their personal good such as personal income. 

Regarding human dignity, given that it is an essential feature of the conception of human 
rights (McCrudden 659; Cohen 582), it can be contended that preserving human dignity 
should be considered the foundation of any human interaction regardless of its setting. To 
this end, protecting human dignity primarily depends on two considerations. First and 
foremost, there is a social feature to human dignity, and so, each human person should be 
perceived as principally connected to society. Put differently, protecting human beings' 

70

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



dignity suggests maintaining a respectable society. Second, and more seriously, human 
beings should be treated as an end rather than as means to an end in line with Kantian 
ethics. Hence, respect for persons in a professional setting is essential to the meaning of 
being ethical as a professional. Consequently, these thoughts should have a main role in 
shaping the conduct of the professional as several instances demonstrate the lack of 
attention to respect for persons in the relationship of professionals to clients via 
deceptions and other unethical practices. These unethical professionals treated their 
clients as a means to achieve monetary gains where no thought was given to the 
sustainability of the relationship.

The abstraction of the pictured ethical foundation of professional ethics cannot be 
complete without examining the concept of moral virtue. As discussed earlier in the 
preceding section, Aristotle sets out the foundation of moral virtue as moderation, and so, 
he sees moral virtue as an average that holds a middle position between two extremes that 
are deficiency and excess. Excess and deficiency, for him, are characteristics of vice, 
while virtue is a moderate between the two extremes; a mean. Professionals are expected 
to be moderate and avoid being deficient or excessive in their professional practices, that 
is, using good judgement to consider likely consequences and act accordingly. 

From our discussion so far, there is no doubt that the three normative ethical theories, 
discussed earlier, have something to contribute to professional ethics. It is also a truism 
that no single ethical approach can offer answers to the many questions arising in the 
professional praxis; no particular ethical approach is exempt from limitations, problems 
and criticism. As such there is a need to harness their different areas of strength, and then 
complement and harmonize them into a workable whole. A threefold normative ethical 
approach seeks to examine the different viewpoints and then see how professionals can 
eventually harmonize the whole by considering their positive aspects. We argue that an 
amalgamation of utilitarian ethical theory, Kantian duty ethics and Aristotelian virtue 
ethics provides the ethical framework for engendering viable professional ethics if the 
positive prescriptions and fundamental assumptions of these normative ethical theories 
are followed by professionals. The prescriptions can be grouped into three main tenets: 
consequences, duties and virtues. 

From a threefold normative ethical approach to professional ethics, consequences play a 
role in the application of moral principles. This approach is against the view that 
consequences make an action right or wrong, but it is the view that a moral agent 
(professional) needs to take into account the consequences when making moral choices. It 
disciplines a professional to be cautious before taking action. Put differently, it gets the 
professional emotionally disciplined in attending to his/her clients. By calculating the 
consequence of an action, the professional is obliged to act more cautiously. Hence, if the 
consequences of breaking a promise are bad enough, then the professional must break the 
promise. The professional is expected to ponder on what to do to avoid grave 
consequences to the greatest number of people if not all. Another tenet of the threefold 
approach is the notion of the sense of duty. Professionals must always act from a sense of 
duty (duty for the sake of duty), doing what is expected of them from the viewpoint of a 
good motive. Acting for the sake of duty entails acting, not because one has anything to 

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           

71



gain from the action, not because one feels like doing it or because one likes doing such 
things, but simply because one has a duty to do it. A sense of duty is necessary for the 
ethical development of any profession and professional. No profession can strive or make 
progress if its practitioners lack a sense of duty or do not take the sense of duty seriously, 
that is, duties of right actions. The third tenet is virtues. Virtues talk about the good 
character traits in human beings, providing grounds for morally suitable actions when 
faced with an ethical dilemma. A good act is something that a good person does and a good 
person has a sure character: a set of virtues rather than vices (Okpo 12). The virtues 
(honesty, integrity, fairness, truthfulness, and trustworthiness among others) that will be 
suitable in the profession will be those which allow a professional to contribute to the 
proper goals of the profession and in so doing lead to human flourishing.

CONCLUSION
In the course of performing their professional duties to meet up with the professional-
client relationship demands, as well as the expectations of their employers and society at 
large, professionals are confronted with a lot of ethical issues, dilemmas and problems. 
Given the normative implications of the two terms profession and professional, 
professionals are expected to be knowledgeable, skilful and ethical individuals. The 
prevailing moral failure among different professionals exposes their moral deficit and the 
inadequacy of professional codes of conduct of the different professional associations. 
Ethics cannot be separated from professional practice. Hence, a professional's moral 
growth emanates from choice, his/her internal disposition and personal conviction and is 
not a function of conformity to codes of conduct alone. Consequently, there are three key 
elements that a professional should observe to operate within acceptable ethical 
parameters, which are the greatest good, respect for human persons and moral virtues.

WORKS CITED
Adeyanju, O.D. “Code of Ethics and Professionalism: Implication for Bank Failure in 

Nigeria” Research Journal of Finance and Accounting. 5(19), 2014: 75 – 86.

Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics, Trans. by Harris Rackham. Hertfordshire: 
Wordsworth Editions, 1996.

Beauchamp, Tom L., and Norman Bowie, eds. Ethical Theory and Business. Englewood 
Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1979.

Bentham, J. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation in the 
Utilitarians. New York: Doubleday, 1991.

Blackburn, M. and P. McGhee. “Talking Virtue: Professionalism in Business and Virtue 
Ethics” Global Virtue Ethics Review 5(4), 2004: 90 – 122.

ndBowie, N.E. Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective. 2  Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press, 2017.

72

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 



Clark, C. Social Work Ethics: Politics, Principles and Practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 
2000.

Cohen, J.T. “Rethinking Human Rights, Democracy, and Sovereignty in the Age of 
Globalisation” Political Theory, 36(4), 2008: 578 – 606.

Dimmock, Mark and Andrew Fisher. Ethics for A-Level. Cambridge, UK: Open Book 
Publishers, 2017.

Ferrell, O. C., John Fraedrich and Linda Ferrell. Business Ethics: Ethical Decision 
Making and Cases. Eighth Edition. Australia: South-Western, Cengage learning, 
2011.

Freeman, S.J. Ethics: An Introduction to Philosophy and Practice. Belmont, CA: 
Wadsworth, 2000.

Fullinwider, R.K. “Professional Codes and Moral Understanding”. Eds. M. Coady and S. 
Block. Codes of Ethics and the Professions. Melbourne: Melbourne University 
Press, 1996.

Gardiner, P. “A Virtue Ethics Approach to Moral Dilemmas in Medicine” Journal of 
Medical Ethics, 29, 2003: 291 – 316.

rd
Hinman, L.M. Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory. 3  Edition. Belmont, CA: 

Wadsworth, 2003.

Hugman, R. New Approaches in Ethics for the Caring Professions, New York: Palgrave 
Macmillan, 2005.

ndKant, Immanuel. Foundations of The Metaphysics of Morals. 2  edition. Translated by 
Lewis White Beck. New York: Library of Liberal Arts, 1990.

McCrudden, C. “Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights” The 
European Journal of International Law, 19(4): 655 – 679.

Mill, John S. On Liberty and Utilitarianism. London: David Campbell Publishers, 1992.
Moore, W.E. Professions: Roles and Rules. New York: Russell Sage, 1970.

Noddlings, N. Caring: A feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley, 
CA: University of California Press, 1984.

Oakley, J. and D. Cocking. Virtue Ethics and Professional Roles. Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press, 2003.

OKPO Consequences, Duties And Virtues: A Threefold Normative ...           

73



Okpo, O. “Value Theory” An Invitation to Philosophy. Ed. Udo Etuk. Uyo: Robertminder 
Publisher, 2009: 28 – 38.

Okpo, O. “Character and Virtue in the Nigerian Banking Profession: An Aristotelian 
Approach to Professional Ethics” Journal of Philosophy and Ethics. 4(1), 2022: 8 
– 18.

Olu-Owolabi, K. A. “Law and Ethics as Siamese Twins: Making a Case for the 
Legalisation of Professional Ethics in Nigeria”. Ed. Aduke Adebayo 
Contemporary Issues in Professional Ethics. Ibadan: Graduke Publishers, 2011.

Omoregbe, J. Ethics: A Systematic and Historical Study. Lagos: Joja Publishers, 1993.

Popkin, R. H. and A. Stroll. Philosophy Made Simple. London: W.H. Allen, 1975.

Randall, J. H. and J. Buchler. Philosophy: An Introduction. USA: Harper& Row 
Publishers, 1971.

Rossouw, Deon. Business Ethics. Pretoria: Southern Book Publishers, 1994.

Solomon, R.C. “Corporate Roles, Personal Virtues: An Aristotelean Approach to 
Business Ethics” Business Ethics Quarterly, 2(3), 1992: 317 – 339.

Sumner, L.W. Welfare, Happiness and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Umerah, Chizoba. “The Teaching Profession”. Eds. Chizoba Umerah, Oby Akaegbobi 
and Joy Eyisi. Excellence in the Teaching Profession. Lagos: Transworld Times 
Press, 2014:  39 – 51.

Velasquez, Manuel G. Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Seventh Edition. 
Edinburgh: Pearson, 2014.

Waluchow, Wilfrid J. The Dimensions of Ethics: An Introduction to Ethical Theory. 
Canada: Broadview Press, 2003.

74

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 1, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

June 


