Universities are places that can offer opportunities for students to examine and test their convictions and perhaps even confirm which might be worth holding. Students in a university community are often contented, well-mannered, friendly, and polite, expressing goodwill to their fellow students and visitors. And universities can time and again be idyllic and vocal places with strong views about a just society, but they can also be places that engage in “virtue signaling” that does not require anything that is actually virtuous. Such utilitarian forms of higher education are based on forms of reciprocity that prioritize exchange and transaction rather than a deeper sense of fellow-feeling that is central to civic friendship.

Left unattended, students can become concerned with their own narrow interests, with their idea of civic friendship becoming ever more utilitarian in the sense that they help others in the full expectation of a similar return later.

Yet, recently the attention to friendship within the Nicomachean Ethics has led numerous scholars to argue that Aristotle views friendship as playing a significant role in human flourishing, that ‘living well’ and the development of virtue cannot be achieved through isolation. A broad definition understands civic virtues as positive character traits that enable citizens to participate positively in the public life of their communities. Participation in the various institutions and organizations of political and civil society can be central to a citizen’s health and well-being. Civic virtue is about going beyond the necessary minimum, it involves an inner state of character that regularly expresses itself in praiseworthy action. So, thinking about civic virtues involves asking: What kind of attitudes, practices, and activities among students should we esteem, welcome, and respect? What states of civic friendship make students function well in their civic role? How can we encourage the development of these virtues in universities?

The value of higher education should surely be seen in the lives of university students—not only in what they do or which professions they go into, but in what they contribute to society and who they become.

Civic Virtues

Civic virtues, informed and underpinned as they are by moral and intellectual virtues, have as their aim the cooperation and mutual goodwill so vital to living well together. I consider civic virtues to be a subclass of moral virtues; that is, as moral virtues applied in larger societal contexts, as distinct from more intimate personal relationships. I see education as concerned with the formation of a person through the realization of certain potentialities that lead to a mature human being. The educational process behind this formation becomes a practical expression of our commitments and will influence how we believe, think, learn, act, and treat each other. It is why formation in virtue ought to be a key feature of higher education. It is not simply about what ought I to do, but also what ought I to be and become. Today many universities operate on the belief that there is a clear separation between intellectual and moral purpose, and they often pursue the former while largely ignoring the latter. It is incumbent on educational settings and educators to provide practical opportunities for civic engagement, and to appreciate where students are already demonstrating civic virtues in their lives; effective—and indeed courageous—leaders and leadership are needed to realize the educational goals of educating an active, informed, and virtuous citizenry.

Civic virtues are not necessarily separate from other types of virtues. Philosophically, as suggested above, “civic” virtues might best be considered as comprising the expression of moral virtues in the civic realm, coupled with the intellectual virtues in so far as they guide the moral virtues in the right direction. This noted, the use of the adjective “civic” is important for at least three reasons. First, it provides a reminder that the scope of virtues education should never be solely on the individual and should recognize the social connectedness of humans to their wider communities. Second, focusing explicitly on the civic permits a particular vocabulary that might be otherwise missed or underemphasized within discourses of character. Third, promoting the importance of civic virtues can act to re-affirm and reinvigorate the civic aims of higher education and the need to cultivate intentionally active, informed, and responsible citizens of good character.

Cultivating Civic Virtue

To understand civic virtues, it is necessary to be clear about the spaces and associations that comprise the public domain. The public domain consists of the wide and vibrant array of institutions, organizations, and processes that exist within communities and societies. For some, the public domain can be separated from the personal interests and lives of individual citizens. While not wishing to encroach overly into personal lives, the public domain should be understood as distinct from, but closely connected to, more intimate associations such as family and friends. Indeed, the public domain and the civic virtues central to it stem from these closer-knit associations. In a flourishing public domain, different interests, ideas, and perspectives are shared and discussed. Where conflicts arise, remedies are sought. Universities are clearly associations in the public domain. It cannot be assumed that the civic virtues needed for engagement in the public domain will develop without deliberate and reflective effort. Indeed, cultivating civic virtues is a core aim of education and has always formed part of a good education.

In recent years, many universities have expressed their commitment to a holistic, socially engaged vision of higher education. Terms such as “fulfilling potential,” “flourishing,” “thriving,” and “well-being,” applied both to students and to university communities, feature prominently in policy documents and mission statements. Listen to graduation speeches or scroll through university websites and mission statements, and today’s universities, in all of their diversity, are eager to encourage students in directions that help them lead flourishing lives as citizens, professionals, and human beings—lives that significantly contribute to the public good and provide an authentic sense of purpose and meaning. Flourishing involves various contingent socio-economic and political factors, but it also relies centrally on the actualization of human excellence through character strengths or virtues: stable dispositions that combine perception, cognition, emotion, motivation, and action to respond in admirable ways to different situations in different spheres of human life.

Some universities join intellectual inquiry to an important civic mission to educate a new generation of responsible citizens and leaders and contribute to the societies around them. In addition to intellectual virtues, the cultivation of civic virtues, such as service and civility, should be part and parcel of this outward-looking dimension of higher education. What is more, where universities focus on educating professionals for a specific sector or seek a specific social impact, certain domain-specific virtues will come clearly into view. Compassion is important for future healthcare professionals, for example, and creativity and perseverance are necessary for aspiring entrepreneurs. Where universities focus on sustainable development as part of their institutional mission, this will require staff and students to exhibit responsibility and social justice.

Character in the University

Practical Wisdom

Of course, the intellectual and civic aspects of character cannot be separated from consideration of what makes for a good life and a flourishing society. They are bound up with moral virtues such as justice, courage, charity, honesty, humility, and compassion. While the idea of modern universities intentionally cultivating moral virtues in their diverse student populations is not without its difficulties, in reality, all institutions have a formative effect on those who inhabit them. A fundamental character virtue at the university level is practical wisdom (phronesis). Practical wisdom is an intellectual meta-virtue that binds together and integrates the intellectual, civic, moral, and performance virtues. It is the overall quality of knowing what to want and what not to want when the demands of two or more virtues collide and integrating such demands into an acceptable course of action. For example, virtues relating to entrepreneurialism might seem to conflict with virtues of service and care. Practical wisdom is the capacity to reason well regarding the right thing to do and to integrate competing emotional, motivational, and situational pressures into an appropriate course of action. Without practical wisdom, any conviction to be courageous will be misguided and will likely fall short of the mark.

Living with practical wisdom entails considered deliberation, well-founded judgment, and the vigorous enactment of decisions. The ability to learn from experience (mistakes and failure as well as success) is at its center. To live with practical wisdom is to be open-minded and to recognize the true variety of things and of situations to be experienced. Practical wisdom entails the active, thoughtful pursuit of what is right and good and is cultivated through experience and reflective deliberation. It comes into its own in higher education as students take ownership of their identity and purpose in the world, having the courage of conviction to do so.

Courage of Conviction

This is all set against a background in which many are keen to point to a decline in civic virtue. They say that the commitment to public life has declined as societies have become larger, more market-oriented, and individualistic with citizens retreating into the private realm. Others have identified a concerning trend towards incivility in political discourse. Whether this decline in civic virtue is real or not, it does seem that contemporary public life holds many challenges for citizens. Within this context, a positive, renewed focus by universities on the meaning, significance, and development of civic virtues is vital for increased participation in the public domain and for the flourishing of healthy, liberal democracies. Universities have a role to play, not all students will be responsive to the cultivation of civic virtues but enough, perhaps even a critical mass, may in return become leaders who will encourage a virtuous citizenry conscious of their civic duties.

Aristotle says that you cannot improve life in a city unless the citizens know and practice the virtues, both moral and civic. Indeed, he says that citizens cannot flourish or be happy if they do not practice the moral and civic virtues. This requires an education that cultivates civic friendships that aim to constrain selfishness and promote the common good of all. Courage is an essential virtue for civic friendship, and it needs commitment to make our convictions a reality. Courage involves intention and can set goals to achieve our intentions. Indeed, this courage must become commitment to engage in civic life. Courage is standing up for what is right and ought to bring out the best in us by helping to provide the meaning and purpose necessary for a flourishing life.

However, this is a morally and educationally complex thing to do, and some think universities may not be the best locations to achieve this. I end with a familiar story of the sinking of the Titanic. Frances Wilson’s excellent book, How to Survive the Titanic or the Sinking of J. Bruce Ismay, offers us insights into moral ambiguity, moral cowardice, and moral failure by focusing on one single incident in a man’s life.

J. Bruce Ismay was the owner of the White Star Line and was on board the fateful voyage of one of its ships, the Titanic in April 1912. Ismay jumped into a lifeboat as it was lowered into the ocean leaving behind two-thirds of the innocent passengers on the ship to drown. This one act was seen as a moral failure and consequently dishonor hounded him for the rest of his life. While Wilson is not sympathetic to Ismay, she does raise questions for each of us. For example, was it immoral to survive in such circumstances? She depicts Ismay as a troubled soul suited to our own uncertain times writing: “There is a difference between surviving and living—and Ismay was a survivor . . . Ismay is that figure we all fear we might be. He is one of us.”
What would we sacrifice our lives for? What are the limits to our civic friendships?

Readers who are interested in more information can consult the statements on Civic Virtues in the Public Domaine and the Framework on Character in Higher Education of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham that are freely available online.