BOOK VII: AKRASIA AND PLEASURE
TABLE 1
Sem. Michael Jhon M. Tamayao
I. CONTINENCE AND INCONTINENCE
PROPOSITIONS
1. Continence & perseverance are
good & laudable; while
incontinence and effeminacy are
evil and censurable.
2. The continent man seems to be
identical w/ the reasonable person
who judges what ought to be done
reasonably.
3. The incontinent man knows
which particular actions are evil,
nevertheless does them out of
passion.
DOUBTS
5. The incontinent man is worse
than the evil man because the latter
can still be dissuaded while the
former is incorrigible and
incurable.
Objections
SOLUTIONS
4. Intemperate man is worse than the
incontinent man because the former
deliberately chooses bodily pleasures,
is impenitent, incurable, and has a
hidden continuing evil habit.
4. A kind of continence can be evil
incase the opinion one holds on is
false.
a.) incontinence can never be good; the
argument above presents the possibility
of a good incontinence incase the
opinion which was not held is false.
b.) there is no incontinence in
abandoning doubtful or false opinions.
c.) ‘imprudence not following a false
opinion + incontinence=virtue’ is absurd
for no virtue is composed of two vices.
5. A continent man always
pursues the good essentially, but
if bad because of false opinion,
only incidentally.
1. It is impossible for a man to be
incontinent when he judges
correctly as a result of knowledge,
because the stronger (knowledge)
is not overcome by the weaker
(passion). Socratic Argument
a.) If continence is impossible, then all
sin is done out of ignorance.
b.) Obviously, many people do what
they know is wrong.
c.) he rejects the ideas:
i. the only cause of sin is ignorance;
ii. man cannot do nothing other than
what he thinks is best;
iii. incontinent persons does not
have knowledge but opinion
1. The incontinent man does not
principally use the universal
proposition (Socratic) but the
particular which he often times
fall into the passions.
4. The temperate man seems to be
continent and persevering.
3. The continent man has vehement
evil desires while the temperate
man does not have.
5. Sometimes a prudent man
cannot be incontinent; sometimes
a prudent man can be incontinent.
2. If knowledge cannot be
overcome by passion, since it is
stronger, then it is knowledge that
resists that causes incontinence
because it is the strongest.
6. People are called incontinent
about emotion, honor and gain.
6. If continence and incontinence
concern not only concupiscence but
anger, wealth, and everything of this
kind, then we will be unable to
determine who is incontinent w/out
qualification.
3. Temperance and continence
agree in matter.
a.) basing from Book VI, since a prudent
man always acts what he knows; he
cannot be prudent and incontinent at the
same time.
b.) prudent man is not only concerned
with the telos, but also has the other
virtues.
6. Essentially, prudence cannot
co-exist with incontinence.
2. There is no incontinence w/out
qualification in the unnecessary
pleasures; only in the necessary
pleasure. Incontinence w/
qualification occurs in the
unnecessary pleasures.
TABLE 2
II. PLEASURE AND PAIN
OPINIONS (opposed to pleasure)
1. No pleasures could be good either intrinsically or incidentally.
Arguments in favor of the opinion:
a. The good has the nature of end while pleasure, which is a
kind of process of the senses to a natural term, has the nature
of means.
a. It is not right to define pleasure as an experienced process
(only to imperfect pleasure) since pleasure is the connatural
activity of a habit already existing.
b. Pleasure is avoided while the good is pursued in temperance.
b. A temperate man enjoys or pleasures in his own activity but
avoids vicious pleasures which are in themselves not good.
c. If pain is avoided in prudence so is its contrary pleasure.
c. The prudent man avoids non-absolute pains but not the
absolute pleasures.
d. In Prudence, pleasure impedes while good does not.
d. The pleasure that impedes the prudent man is a pleasure
alien to him, not the pleasure arising from habit.
e. Good is a product of art, while pleasure is not since no art is
merely for pleasure.
e. Art can bring about ‘process’/ ‘capacity’ but not the
activities themselves. Good and pleasure therefore are not
product of art.
f. Pursuing pleasure is attributive to children and dumb
animals
f. Children and animals pursue non-absolute pleasures and not
the absolute one.
2. Not all pleasures are good because some pleasures are shameful, some
causes sickness and some are simply bad.
3. No pleasure is the highest good since pleasure is not an end but a
process.
1
REFUTATIONS (of previous opinions)
2. Pleasure can be good either intrinsically or incidentally.
Counter-arguments in favor of pleasure:
Except for pleasures that creates habits with pain and desire.
1. Pleasurable things are evil from one angle in as much as pleasurable
objects are injurious to health; but such logic is erroneous and dangerous
for one may be lead in thinking that because pleasure is at times injurious
it becomes totally bad.
3. There is no need to exclude pleasure entirely as the highest good so
that something else must be better than pleasure. Moreover, not all
pleasures are processes, which are lesser than the ends, nor are they
accompanied by some processes.1 Some pleasures are activities, therefore
ends in themselves. Moreover, Happiness, being the highest good, is an
unimpeded activity; while one kind of pleasure is also an unimpeded
activity. So, there is a highest pleasure that in which happiness consists.