The aim of this paper is to provide a reconstruction of Aristotle's discussion of incontinence, which stresses the relevant aspects from the point of view of a virtue ethics, focusing as a such not primarily on particular actions but on habitual dispositions of character. The paper emphasizes also the connection between Aristotle's account of incontinence and his conception of practical rationality, especially the issue concerning the temporal dimension of practical reason.

This paper briefly explores the connections among Socratic, Aristotelian and Stoic treatment of incontinence or weakness of the will. The core of the article is focused on the Stoic reception of Socratic ethics through Aristotle's mediation. The early Stoics took into account both certain components of Socratic ethics and Aristotle's account of action. Despite their intellectualism, the Stoics elabórate an argumentative strategy to demónstrate that it is possible to maintain that an agent is both able to make correct moral judgment (...) and admit that such an agent is capable of acting against it. (shrink)

La argumentación en contra de la posibilidad de akrasia que encontramos en las Disertaciones de Epicteto ha sido frecuentemente desatendida en los desarrollos modernos y contemporáneos de la problemática de la incontinencia. Esto se ha debido fundamentalmente al hecho de que las reflexiones de Epicteto suelen ser reducidas a una mera reelaboración de motivos socráticos bajo ejes dogmáticos estoicos. Por el contrario, será nuestro objetivo poner de manifiesto la singular riqueza teórica que subyace bajo la argumentación de nuestro esclavo (...) estoico destinada... a comprender en forma sistemática la conducta del incontinente. Esto exigirá contrastar el modelo de análisis de Epicteto con otras alternativas interpretativas del fenómeno de la akrasia. The argument against the possibility of akrasia that we find en Epictetus , has frequently been neglected in modern and contemporary discussions around the problem of incontinence. This has mainly been due to the fact that Epictetus' meditations tend to be reduced to a mere reproduction of Socratic issues under Stoic dogmas. On the contrary, it will be our goal to bring to light the remarkable theoretical richness that underlies the argument of our Stoic slave that aims at understanding in a systematic manner the behaviour of the incontinent. This will oblige us to contrast Epictetus' model of analysis with other interpretative alternatives of the phenomenon of akrasia. (shrink)

El estudio de la akrasía o incontinencia que Aristóteles abre en el libro VII de Ética a Nicómaco es una de las primeras aproximaciones filosóficas al problema de la maldad específicamente humana. Este artículo comienza identificando el tipo humano que revela la akrasía, señalando su importancia filosófica y exponiendo brevemente la explicación aristotélica del fenómeno. Después categoriza las diferentes formas que puede asumir la transgresión de los propios principios morales, según dos criterios independientes. Por un lado, el tipo de (...) deseo que vence a la razón. Por otro lado, el momento del razonamiento práctico en el que tiene lugar la akrasía. Cruzando ambos criterios, encontramos una tipología rica y matizada de la akrasía, así como de la enkráteia. Asimismo, se ofrece una interpretación del valor moral de esta tipología, en el que cada uno de los tipos akrásicos merece una determinada calificación ética. Finalmente, esta evaluación ilumina la propia concepción ética y antropológica de Aristóteles. (shrink)

Whit the aim of clariflying what exactly is the human phenomenon of akrasía or incontinence in the fullest sense, in Nicomachean Ethics VII.4-10 Aristotle introduces a type of incontinence by analogy, that is, incontinence due to thymós or courage. Despite his intentions, the explanation of the latter only complicates understanding the former, and the reader ends up without a clear understandingof either. The purpose of this article is to shed some light on the subject of akrasía due to thymós, trying, (...) specifically, to answer three questions: what exactly is this passion? Who are worse, those who get carried away by their appetites or those who get carried away by their anger, and why? Finally, are we responsible for the mistakes we make in a fit of anger? (shrink)

La filosofía política platónica está atravesada por una marcada preocupación epistemológica, sobre cuya base Platón adopta el así llamado “intelectualismo socrático”, lo cual implica un rechazo tajante del actuar incontinente o _akrasía_. En el presente trabajo intentaremos mostrar que el propio Platón llevó adelante una revisión de dicha posición, ante todo debido a un cambio profundo en su concepción de la naturaleza humana en el diálogo _Leyes_.

In this paper I suggest a reconstruction of the traditional concepts of con-tinent and incontinent action. This reconstruction proceeds along the lines of a standpoint of bounded rationality. My suggestion agrees with some relevant aspects of Davidson’s treatment of this topic. One of these aspects is that incontinent action is typically signalled by the following two subjective experiences: a feeling of surprise towards one’s own action and a difficulty in understanding oneself; another is that incontinence cannot simply be disposed of (...) in terms of some inability of the agent to avoid “succumbing to temptation”; still another is the view that inconti-nent action is common in real human affairs. But my suggestion dis-agrees with other relevant aspects of Davidson’s treatment of inconti-nence too. In particular, it avoids what I take to be its two major draw-backs. These are a view of continent action that falls prey to a com-pletely unrealistic concept of psychological rationality and the idea that incontinence necessarily involves a dimension of essential irrationality. (shrink)