Analysis Of Aristotle's Responsibility And Vice

Responsibility and Vice is a topic that Aristotle argues in the Nicomachean Ethics . His argument is based off of the presumption that we are responsible, and open to praise or blame, for having a virtuous or vicious character. His claim for this argument is that we are ultimately in charge of our character, which is decided through our actions. Although Aristotle believes in this, however there are times in life where you are not in complete control of your actions.

Aristotle will ultimately say that almost everything we do is in our control, but when we are young and ignorant, we cannot always fully grasp the concept of what we are doing. Aristotle’s response to an objection would be that there are different types of actions, involuntary and voluntary, that define the actions that we do. I will elaborate upon Aristotle’s argument, find plausible objections to it, discuss how he would react to this objection, and finally evaluate the whole process.

To begin with, in the Nicomachean Ethics Book 3, Aristotle evaluates a person’s actions and determines which category of action they fall under. Aristotle talks in terms of the voluntary, that which we’re responsible for, and the involuntary, that which we don’t feel responsible for. He considers two main ways in which things become involuntary, compulsion and ignorance.

Opposing this to what is voluntary, these two ideas would be causes for why something turns out the way it does. The voluntary action must take place with the knowledge of the person doing the action

So, my question is, to what extent are we responsible for our ignorance. According to Aristotle, it seems that the ignorance must be related to specific circumstances over which the person had no control. For example, a person is not responsible for getting a friend some food that made him sick because he did not know that the food was