Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Aristotle's virtuous agent acts from stable rational dispositions (hexeis) that motivate without requiring occurrent felt pleasure as the proximate cause.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Aristotle explicitly states virtuous activity is pleasant and that flourishing involves hedone; stable disposition alone doesn't explain motivation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Without some affective component (pleasure or pain), it's unclear why a hexis would move an agent to act rather than remain inert knowledge.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Virtuous agents exhibit consistent behavior across contexts without deliberating each action, suggesting stable dispositions rather than pleasure-seeking.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If virtue required occurrent pleasure as proximate cause, moral weakness would be inexplicable—we'd always act on felt pleasure.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Aristotle distinguishes virtue from mere continence, implying virtuous action flows directly from character, not pleasure-driven calculation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.