Book 7 / Chapter 8
Paragraph 2 - Incontinence and Vice
Explanation - Part By Part
"Evidently, then, incontinence is not vice (though perhaps it is so in a qualified sense); for incontinence is contrary to choice while vice is in accordance with choice;"
Aristotle is clarifying the difference between incontinence (lack of self-control) and vice (deep moral corruption or wickedness). He argues that incontinence is not the same as vice, though it might seem similar in some ways. The distinction lies in the role of choice.
- Incontinence goes against choice. This means that an incontinent person often knows the right thing to do but is overwhelmed by their impulses or desires, acting contrary to their better judgment. For example, someone might know it’s unhealthy to eat an entire cake but can’t resist doing so.
- Vice, on the other hand, aligns with choice. A vicious person deliberately and consciously chooses to do something wrong because they believe it’s acceptable or even good, based on corrupt values or reasoning. For them, moral wrongdoing feels consistent with their character or worldview.
In simple terms: the incontinent person fights (and sometimes loses) the battle between reason and desire, while the vicious person has already made peace with doing wrong because it fits their distorted sense of right and wrong.
"not but what they are similar in respect of the actions they lead to; as in the saying of Demodocus about the Milesians, 'the Milesians are not without sense, but they do the things that senseless people do',"
In this part, Aristotle is pointing out that while incontinence (a lack of self-control) and vice (deliberate moral wrongdoing) are fundamentally different in how they arise—one being against choice and the other aligned with it—they can appear similar because they often result in the same kinds of actions.
To illustrate this, he uses a quotation from Demodocus about the Milesians, a group of people known for peculiar behavior. The saying goes, “The Milesians are not without sense, but they do the things that senseless people do.” In other words, the Milesians are not inherently foolish, but they sometimes act as if they are, perhaps out of carelessness or habit.
Similarly, Aristotle explains that incontinent people are not fundamentally wicked or morally "broken," but the way their lack of control manifests can make them behave in ways that resemble the actions of truly vicious or criminal individuals. The key distinction lies in the inner process: vice comes from a deliberate choice to act badly, while incontinence is more about failing to resist impulses despite understanding what is right.
"so too incontinent people are not criminal, but they will do criminal acts."
This part emphasizes a significant distinction: someone who is incontinent (lacking self-control) is not inherently a bad or "criminal" person in their character, but their lack of control can lead them to act in ways that resemble the behavior of someone criminal or immoral. In other words, their problem lies in their failure to resist impulses, not in an intentionally corrupt or malicious nature. Aristotle seems to be drawing attention to the fact that their actions might look similar to those of bad people, but the root cause is different—it's not deliberate wickedness, but a weakness in their ability to act according to reason or better judgment.