Book 7 / Chapter 1
Paragraph 4 - Continence and Incontinence: A Consideration of Virtue and Vice
Explanation - Part By Part
"Now both continence and endurance are thought to be included among things good and praiseworthy, and both incontinence and softness among things bad and blameworthy; and the same man is thought to be continent and ready to abide by the result of his calculations, or incontinent and ready to abandon them."
Aristotle begins by outlining the general societal view of certain traits. "Continence" (self-control or self-restraint) and "endurance" (the ability to persist through difficulties or resist temptations) are seen as admirable qualities—behaviors we generally respect and praise in people. In contrast, "incontinence" (the lack of self-control) and "softness" (a tendency to easily give in, especially to pleasures or difficulties) are viewed negatively, as failings that invite criticism.
He adds that a person's actions reflect these traits. A continent person is someone who can stick to their rational decisions or well-thought-out plans, even when their desires or emotions try to lead them astray. On the other hand, an incontinent person knows what the right course of action is but instead gives in to passions or impulses, abandoning their better judgment. It’s a tension between reason and emotion, with one being victorious (continence) or overwhelmed (incontinence).
"And the incontinent man, knowing that what he does is bad, does it as a result of passion, while the continent man, knowing that his appetites are bad, refuses on account of his rational principle to follow them."
Aristotle explains here that an incontinent person acts against their better judgment. They know that what they are doing is wrong or harmful, but their emotions or desires (what Aristotle calls "passion") overpower their reasoning. On the other hand, a continent person is aware of these same bad desires but consciously chooses not to give in to them. Their rational side—their reasoning and principles—wins out over their impulses. Essentially, the incontinent person surrenders to temptation, while the continent person resists it through self-control and logical thinking.
"The temperate man all men call continent and disposed to endurance, while the continent man some maintain to be always temperate but others do not; and some call the self-indulgent man incontinent and the incontinent man self-indulgent indiscriminately, while others distinguish them."
Aristotle is pointing out how people often conflate or distinguish between certain types of behavior. Specifically:
- A temperate person (someone with self-control who keeps their desires in check through balance and moderation) is universally seen as someone who has a quality of continence (self-restraint) and willingness to endure discomfort to do what is right. This means that temperance and continence are closely associated.
- However, there is a debate when it comes to whether a continent person (someone who practices self-restraint despite strong desires) is always temperate. Some people argue that every continent person must also be temperate, while others think the two are not necessarily the same—perhaps because temperance involves a natural harmony between desires and reason, while continence can involve a struggle to resist desires that oppose reason.
- Similarly, people debate whether self-indulgence (someone who gives in to excessive desires) is the same thing as incontinence (someone who lacks the self-restraint even when they know better). Some treat these terms as interchangeable, while others recognize a difference. For example, a self-indulgent person might not care whether their desires are wrong (fully embracing their excess), while an incontinent person might be aware that their actions are bad but still struggle and fail to resist.
This passage highlights Aristotle trying to analyze nuanced human behaviors and emotions that are often lumped together or misunderstood. He is striving to clarify these distinctions and explore their meanings more deeply.
"The man of practical wisdom, they sometimes say, cannot be incontinent, while sometimes they say that some who are practically wise and clever are incontinent."
This part tackles a debate about the relationship between practical wisdom (phronesis) and incontinence (akrasia, or lack of self-control). Aristotle highlights an apparent contradiction in how people view the practically wise person, who is someone skilled in reasoning and decision-making in everyday matters.
On one hand, it is argued that a person with practical wisdom cannot be incontinent because their rational understanding should guide their actions. Being wise implies having the ability to align one’s behavior with what is known to be good and right, so they wouldn't give in to reckless desires or impulses.
On the other hand, some argue that even practically wise and clever people can fail to act in accordance with their wisdom due to overwhelming passions or desires. In this view, being “wise” doesn’t necessarily guarantee the ability to consistently control one’s actions, especially when emotions or appetites are powerful.
This discussion sets the stage for Aristotle to delve deeper into the nature of wisdom, self-control, and how they interact. He's exploring: Can knowledge alone ensure virtuous behavior, or is there something else—perhaps a strong will or character—needed to act rightly?
"Again men are said to be incontinent even with respect to anger, honour, and gain.-These, then, are the things that are said."
Aristotle is pointing out that people can exhibit a lack of self-control, or incontinence, in a variety of areas beyond physical pleasures, such as food or drink. Specifically, he mentions that some individuals are unable to control their impulses or desires when it comes to anger, pursuit of honor (recognition or status), or gain (greed or material wealth). This highlights that incontinence is not limited to one kind of passion or appetite but can manifest in different aspects of human behavior where self-restraint fails.