Human Acts and Liabilities

Socrates stated that "no whiz is voluntarily wicked nor involuntarily blessed," and this shows an important and major assumption made by him regarding hu homo nature, hu bit behavior, and human intentions. Those who break wicked acts must be doing so from constraint or ignorance. Socrates refuses to believe that any one and only(a) can accept evil, for to do so is to go against the basic human yearning for the good and for the positive. Aristotle makes a do of distinctions regarding actions that atomic number 18 voluntary and those that are involuntary which might reckon to be saying the same thing, but Aristotle is non hardly stating that those who do good are making woofs and those who do disparage are not, for that would absolve human beings of all responsibility for their actions. He makes this clear when he states:

. . . it is absurd to blame external great deal rather than oneself for falling an easy prey to such attractions, and to grip oneself responsible for noble deeds, time pleasure is held responsible for one's institute deeds. (54)

At the same time, Aristotle says that every wicked person is in a state of ignorance and acting out of error. However, an act is not involuntary simply out of ignorance:

Ignorance in moral choice does not make an act involuntary--it makes it wicked; nor does ignorance of the universal, for that invites reproach; rather, it is ignorance of the particulars which const

Attaining virtue thus becomes an exercise in avoiding the extremes. A familiarity of what is distant to a given virtue, what would be too much and what would be too little, is the knowledge needed, and this is knowledge that can be as genuineed from an examination of choices open to us.

gentle nature comes in two different kinds, the one financial aid toward the intellect and the good and persuadable by logic and argument, and the separate tending toward the passions and evil and in need of correction by pain, as would be true of an animal. This latter is the inferior man who can be compelled by the force of law. Aristotle argued that the good for man must be found in his nature, in that which is ludicrous to the human being.

Aristotle notes in Book II the distinction to be made between the mean and the extremes. The extremes are two vices, one marked by excess and the other by deficiency, while virtue is the mean. Each is in some sense opposed to the others--the extremes are opposed to one another, and virtue is opposed to individually of the extremes:

Aristotle points to the fact that people who exigency to excel at a sport do so by practicing, by living and acting in a certain way in order to achieve a certain goal. Moral characters are also formed by engaging in certain actions. Aristotle also refutes the idea that the wicked man does not want to be wicked. He says that it is unreasonable to maintain that the individual who acts unjustly does not wish to be unjust:

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.