In this blog post, we explore why we are swayed by desire even when we know what is right, through Aristotle and Socrates.
Aristotle presents “akrasia,” or lack of self-control, as one of the three moral states that humans should avoid, along with ‘vice’ and “brutality.”
In general, lack of self-control refers to a state of actually acting contrary to what is rationally judged to be best. In other words, it refers to a state of psychological conflict in which one is unable to follow one’s judgment even though one has a sense of what is right. However, Socrates takes a different position. According to him, even if a person “truly” recognizes that an act is wrong, they cannot commit that act.
In other words, if someone commits a wrongdoing, it is only because they are ignorant, and those who have true knowledge do not commit wrongdoings. Socrates found the root of all wrongdoings in ignorance, and from this perspective, the phenomenon commonly referred to as lack of self-control cannot exist in the first place.
Aristotle pointed out that Socrates’ argument does not correspond to actual human behavior. He believed that in the real world, people often know what they believe to be right, but do not follow it in their actual behavior. Even people who lack self-control clearly recognize that it is wrong to give in to temptation before they do so. However, despite this awareness, at some point, desire overwhelms reason, and they end up doing the wrong thing. For example, this is the case when a person who knows very well that they need to reduce their food intake for health reasons easily gives in when faced with delicious food. This behavior is a clear example of a lack of self-control and is often observed in everyday life.
Aristotle divides akrasia into two types. One is when a person succumbs to desire, and the other is when a person is dominated by anger. A person who is trying to diet but cannot resist the urge to eat and breaks their plan is an example of the former, which is a case where momentary desire overpowers rational judgment.
On the other hand, when a person loses self-control due to anger, it is because reason perceives that they have been “insulted” and emotions judge that “this must be punished,” leading to action. In the latter case, emotions tend to combine with reason to justify anger. Aristotle believes that lack of self-control due to desire is more shameful than lack of self-control due to anger.
This is because desire tends to ignore the control of reason much more blatantly than anger. In other words, anger can sometimes be accepted as moral indignation, but simple desire conflicts more clearly with rational judgment.
Then, how does lack of self-control, or akrasia, differ from “intemperance” (akolasia)?
Both concepts are similar in that they are related to physical desires and pleasures. However, akrasia has a broader scope. This is because, beyond physical pleasures, even non-physical areas such as passion, honor, and victory can be causes of akrasia. The difference is not only in the scope of the object. An unrestrained person chooses pleasure “rationally.”
In other words, they believe that pleasure is the goal and purpose of life and actively pursue it. Such people do not feel guilt or remorse for their choices, and therefore are not easily corrected or improved. This is because their pursuit of pleasure is based on an unwavering “rational decision.”
On the other hand, people with no self-control act impulsively without such firm rational beliefs.
They know that certain behaviors are wrong and rationally recognize the need for restraint. However, in their actual behavior, they fail to follow that recognition and succumb to their desires. In other words, they are people who act differently even though they know better. In this sense, people who lack self-control have the potential to repent and change. They still have the right judgment, but they are simply unable to act on it.
Aristotle therefore considers people with self-control to be morally superior to those without self-control. This is because people with self-control, even if they are dominated by temptation, do not deny their best judgment itself. They still have the seeds of reason, which leaves open the possibility of leading them back to the right path.
