Philosophic Classics From Plato to Derrida

NICOMACHEANETHICS(BOOKVII) 205

resolution which Odysseus had persuaded him to adopt, because it gives him pain to
tell a lie.
Further, [concerning (1) and (3),] the sophistic argument presents a problem. The
Sophists want to refute their opponents by leading them to conclusions which contra-
dict generally accepted facts. Their purpose is to have success bring them the reputation
of being clever, and the syllogism which results only becomes a problem or quandary
[for their opponents]. For the mind is in chains when, because it is dissatisfied with the
conclusion it has reached, it wishes not to stand still, while on the other hand its inabil-
ity to resolve the argument makes forward movement impossible. Now, they have one
argument which leads to the conclusion that folly combined with moral weakness
is virtue. This is the way it runs: [if a man is both foolish and morally weak,] he acts
contrary to his conviction because of his moral weakness; but [because of his folly,]
his conviction is that good things are bad and that he ought not to do them. Therefore,
[acting contrary to his conviction,] he will do what is good and not what is bad.
A further problem [arises from (2) and (4)]. A person who, in his actions, pursues,
and prefers what is pleasant, convinced or persuaded [that it is good],* would seem to
be better than one who acts the same way not on the basis of calculation, but because of
moral weakness. For since he may be persuaded to change his mind, he can be cured
more easily. To a morally weak man, on the other hand, applies the proverb, “When
water chokes you, what can you wash it down with?” For if he had been persuaded to
act the way he does, he would have stopped acting that way when persuaded to change
his mind. But as it is, though persuaded that he ought to do one thing, he nevertheless
does another.
Finally, if everything is the province of moral weakness and moral strength, who
would be morally weak in the unqualified sense of the word? No one has every form of
moral weakness, but we do say of some people that they are morally weak in an unqual-
ified sense.
These are the sort of problems that arise. Some of the conflicting opinions must
be removed and others must be left intact. For the solution of a problem is the discovery
[of truth].

3. Some Problems Solved: Moral Weakness and Knowledge:Our first step is,
   then, to examine (1) whether morally weak people act knowingly or not, and, if know-
   ingly, in what sense. Secondly, (2) we must establish the kind of questions with which a
   morally weak and a morally strong man are concerned. I mean, are they concerned with
   all pleasure and pain or only with certain distinct kinds of them? Is a morally strong per-
   son the same as a tenacious person or are they different? Similar questions must also be
   asked about all other matters germane to this study.
   The starting point of our investigation is the question (a)whether the morally
   strong man and the morally weak man have their distinguishing features in the situa-
   tions with which they are concerned or in their manner [of reacting to the situation].
   What I mean is this: does a morally weak person owe his character to certain situations
   to [which he reacts], or to the manner [in which he reacts], or to both? Our second
   question (b)is whether or not moral weakness and moral strength are concerned with
   all [situations and feelings. The answer to both these questions is that] a man who is
   morally weak in the unqualified sense is not [so described because of his reaction] to
   every situation, but only to those situations in which also a self-indulgent man may get

25

30

35

1146 b

5

10

*I.e., a self-indulgent person.

15

20