Book 7 / Chapter 4
Paragraph 1 - The Nature of Incontinence
Explanation - Part By Part
"We must next discuss whether there is any one who is incontinent without qualification, or all men who are incontinent are so in a particular sense, and if there is, with what sort of objects he is concerned."
Aristotle is raising the question of whether there exists a person who is completely and universally "incontinent" (lacking self-control or easily swayed by desires), or if people who lack self-control are always so in specific, limited ways. Essentially, he’s asking: Is there such a thing as being completely ruled by impulses in every aspect of life, or is a lack of self-control always tied to certain specific desires or temptations? Then, if a fully incontinent person exists, Aristotle wants to explore what types of things this hypothetical person has no control over. This sets up his deeper exploration of human behavior with respect to self-control and desire.
"That both continent persons and persons of endurance, and incontinent and soft persons, are concerned with pleasures and pains, is evident."
Aristotle is emphasizing that both types of people—those with self-control (continent or enduring individuals) and those lacking it (incontinent or soft individuals)—are fundamentally dealing with the same thing: pleasures and pains. The key issue in moral behavior, according to Aristotle, revolves around how people respond to these pleasures and pains. While one group masters and controls these impulses for immediate satisfaction (or avoids discomfort), the other succumbs to them. This distinction is critical for understanding human behavior and ethical choice.