Virtue ethics takes the agent as the center, while deontology and utilitarianism take the action as the centerThe agent as the center, Virtue ethics has no choice but to be concerned to peoples Moral Psychology (motivation, desire, emotion, character, etc), withvirtue as its basic concept; action as the center, represented by Kant deontology which takes universal principles and obligations in its center, the utilitarianism puts utility in its centerDeontology and utilitarianism have their theories of virtue, but in its theory are subordinate, Kants deontology s theory of virtue is the embodiment of the obligations and so that the virtue is the powerWhile Mill inherits Bentham and is affected by the stoic and Christian ethics

The ideas of freedom and equality, which have remained the central concepts in modern political philosophy, are assumed to be intrinsically consistentHowever, important representatives of modern political thoughts, including John Rock,Rousseau, Rawls and Nozick, put forwards theories indicating that there are inconsistency and conflicts between the two ideasLocke claims that the rights to life, liberty and property are all equity rights human beings are endowed by nature,which are formally equal but essentially include the right to unequal propertyWhereas Rousseau, from the perspective of inequity of human original, points out that due to the emergence of private ownership and the inequality of possession leads to political nonfreedomTherefore,to achieve political freedom lies with the establishment of the political community which is free from private ownership or with limited private propertyRawlss theory of justice, which relatively differentiates political freedom and economic equality from social equality, gives priorities to political freedom and political equality, and sets norms for wealth, thereby showing a tendency to equalityNozick proposes that Rawlss equal distribution model is a violation of freedom

Contemporary communitariianism criticizes sharply liberalism in many ways,among them mainly concerning universalism,the views of the self and community.Communitarianism opposes universalism,the transcendent view of the self,and provides one view of individual personality and characteristic defined by community.The criticism of communitarianism advances the discussion of contemporary political philosophy,though not all of their criticisms can be justified.

The character of public places is commonality and openness,and public autonomy,while the character of private places is privacy and personal autonomy.The division of public places and private places are relative,their relation is dialectic.Social morality depends on public interest,the core of which is the protection for individual right and interest in society,while the root for the protection for private interest lies in private places.Therefore,social morality and individual morality exist in a mutual and dialectic relation.

The principle of majority is one operating principle which democracy sets up. The principle of majority leads to the rule of majority. However, the rule of majority often results in the dictatorship of majority in the history of democracy, namely, the dictatorship of majority to minority. Democracy institution in Ancient Greek is one of majority dictatorship, and in the early time of modern Western democracy, for example, in America, there was the problem of majority dictatorship. The essence of majority dictatorship lies in the dictatorship to the minority who has the political or religious opinions different from majority. There is another dictatorship, which can be called by minority dictatorship, or called by elite rule, which is the one to society by the few of politicians, kings, empires, other autocrats or group of autocrats. From majority dictatorship to the elite rule, though it is different kinds of patterns, the nature of two is the same as there are no rights for the minority, or not protect the rights of minority. To protect the rights of minority and to limit the rights of majority, is the basic way to build democracy.

Social fact is the one kind of facts which human can recognize and experience. The distinction of social fact from natural fact lies in its value implication. Value comes from it and different values decide different characteristics of social facts. According to the different relation with social facts, values can be divided into three sections: The first one lies in social spiritually facts, the second one is behavior value, and the third one embodies spiritual value and is carried by physical materials.

As a logical starting point of the economic ethics concept, "economic homo" is a transfer of the same concept from traditional mainstream economic theories. In theoretical inference and social practice of economic ethics, however, the concept of economic homo has met with formidable difficulties, and has been caught in a dilemma. The "prisoner dilemma" shows the internal difficulties of both collective and individual rationality based on the concept of economic homo. The concept needs to be reconsidered and the concept of an individual's full understanding of good life combined with individual as a social responsibility and obligation holder needs to be introduced into the discussion of economic ethics.

The relationship of social communication is an elemental factor of social practice manifested in two relationships: the “subjective-objecrive” and the “subjective-subjective”. The latter, in other words, is the intersubjective relationship, intrinsically implying that the individuals should enjoy equal recognition and respect one another,the realization of which is a matter of freedom in the history of human society. However, during the long course of human history the ethical relation has been twisted, getting the “subjective-subjective”relation alienated to one of the “subjective-objective”. nevertheless, the human society is moving towards a relationship of general recognition, respect, and ethical freedom.

Historic analysis and moral analysis are two basic means by which people interpret and handle world affairs. Under certain historic circumstances historic rationality may contradict moral rationality because historic development sometimes mingles up with evil. Even the fact that evil may function as a lever in history does not reduce its notorious reputation in terms of morality. It is the ultimate goodness that functions as criterion for evaluation of the two means. Therefore,valid social evaluation should reflect unity of historic rationality and moral rationality.

Nonutilitarianism and utilitarianism in social life are the features of pre-modern andmodern societies respectively. In the respect of value concept, tile major omen ofoncoming Chinese modernization is that utilitarianism is getting more and morepopular in our society. But, both nonutilitarian value (spiritual value) and utilitarianvalue are aspects of demands of human nature. Therefore, we should make use ofutilitarianism to realize the transision from pre-mernrnes to moderness, while at thesame time solve the social problems caused by spreading of utilitarianism, in order tomake dual realization of +utilitarian value(interets)and moral value(moral obligations).