Akrasia Vs Ignorance

Inconsistency in Reason - Akrasia vs. Ignorance

In this paper, I am going to discuss Plato and Aristotle's viewpoints on inconsistency within the soul in accordance with virtue and vice. Aristotle identifies bad and good states of character. The bad includes vice, inconsistency, lack of moderation, and brutality. These are mirrored alongside their positive counterparts of virtue, superhuman virtue, moderation, and consistency. This can also be extrapolated to cover softness and its opposite of endurance and courage. The problem arises when considering inconsistency and incontinence between these paralleled vices and virtues. In this Paper, I will analyze and provide an account of how the philosophers Plato and Aristotle tackle questions regarding this inconsistency. The questions that arrive regarding this are as follows. How does inconsistency arise and manifest itself, and in what way does it delineate itself from vice. The two philosophers both construct different frameworks for understanding how this inconsistency and vice arise.

The person who is weak consults their reason and goes through a process of roundabout deliberation until finally making a bad choice not in accordance with that reason. The other type of Akratic individual is one who is swayed by passion, and again, rather than act in accordance with his reasoned choice, acts under the influence of a passion in the rejection of reason. The worst form of Akrasia is the individual who acts without deliberation. This is a person who avoids deliberation through pleasure and ignores reason until they experience the backlash and inevitable clarity of hindsight. This is an individual who simply acts under the influence of a passion. In practice they feel no remorse at time of action but once completed, they regret their acts and scold themselves. In this way, deliberation comes too late to save the