, we are then able to use our unique function to determine which acts are good and should be acted upon. Aristotle declares that good acts are those that are completed in moderation. There must be neither a lack nor an excess of the virtue relative to each separate situation. It is through this Doctrine of the Golden Mean by which we are to choose which acts are virtuous. For example, courage is the mean between cowardice and foolhardiness. According to Aristotle, only those acts that are courageous are to be done. Anything other than acting out of courage would not be virtuous. Yet a problem is posed if the Golden Mean is to be applied in all situations that require a free choice. There are some actions in which a middle ground does not exist. There is no mean between murdering someone and sparing his or her life. The respect for one’s existence seems to take precedence in all circumstances.With all this said, my moral system of respect and reasoning seem to correlate closely to those of Aristotle and his Virtue Theory of ethics. As I attempt to live my life in a virtuous manner I am also striving to make the world around me a better place, so far as my meager efforts will permit. To demonstrate this and the commonalties between Aristotle and myself, I shall present an ethical issue and the process of making a final decision.As a student of business and commerce, who will one day become an accountant, I will be required to submit myself to several codes of ethics and will no doubt be bound to them in all situations. Deviation from such ethical codes, such as the divulgence of insider information, would most likely to lead to serious consequences including the possible loss of my Public Accountant certification. Although I understand such consequences, there may come a time when I must call into question my moral beliefs and what is most important to me.The following ethical question was brought up on the State Unive...
