According to Aristotle, an uncontrolled person acts voluntarily
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says
The available literature points to Aristotle's discussion of self-control and intemperance in works like the Eudemian Ethics and Nicomachean Ethics, but provides only partial coverage regarding whether an uncontrolled person specifically acts voluntarily.
peculiarities of the ostrich, which seemed to Aristotle, according to what he had heard of it, to be something … intemperate person acts from desire but not from moral purpose. On the other hand a temperate person acts from … money-getting, which, according to some, is identical with household management, according to others, a prin-
Aristotle on the voluntariness of self-control and the lack of self-control (EE II 8, 1224a7-1225a2): British Journal for the History of Philosophy: Vol 29, No 1
## ABSTRACT
I argue that in Eudemian Ethics II 8 Aristotle provides us with a general definition of force (bia) applicable to all natural phenomena. This definition points us to an important, though rarely noticed, requirement for voluntary action; namely that the impulse acted upon be natural to its possessor. The definition of force is further put to use in the chapter to solve puzzles concerning self-control and the lack of it. In addition to laying bare his solution to these puzzles, I emphasize Aristotle’s keen interest in explaining the mistake of his opponents; namely those who deny that self-control and its lack are voluntary. Most importantly, some of Aristotle's replies work with premisses accepted by, and granted to, his interlocutors to point out their mistakes.
KEYWORDS:
### Acknowledgements
I am grateful to audiences which heard versions of this paper at Marquette University and at Yale University for their helpful comments and suggestions, and especially to David Charles for discussion of many topics ad
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.