Socrates Views On Akrasia

No One Does Wrong Willingly

The problem of akrasia is a critical theoretical issue in the history of western philosophy, contemporary western philosophy, and moral philosophy. This problem was first raised by Socrates. The Greek word for the weakness of will or incontinence is akrasia, generally refers to that acts which violate the best choices of human beings. Besides, the problem of akrasia means that is it possible for people to do actions which violate their best choices? Socrates clear stated that incontinent behaviors are not possible. This view is mainly reflected in his opinion which is no one errs or does wrong willingly or knowingly. This essay will discuss that the reason why Socrates believed that nobody knowingly or voluntarily
Why is the weakness of will impossible? In Protagoras, Socrates argued his point. He started his argument from the premise of pursuing happiness and avoiding suffering as human nature. The reason why most people do not accept the impossibility of weakness of will is that they thought that the factor that dominates people's behavior was not people's knowledge but is emotions such as lust, happiness, pain, love, Fear and so on. That's why most believed that many people know the best, but not willing to do it. These people are not conquered by knowledge, but other things, like happiness. Therefore, the premise which public can understand is that pursuit of happiness and avoid suffering is human nature. Although this premise is helpful for Socrates to prove his point of view, he did not approve of the premise. In Protagoras, he said that knowledge could not be enslaved by other affections, including happiness. Knowledge and wisdom are the most powerful determinants of human beings (Plato, Protagoras, 352c-d). The purpose of Socratic's argumentation is to make people admit that weakness is impossible. Since most people believe Hedonism, he uses this premise which most people considered to proof his argument and help him to persuade people to accept his point of view. Hence, Socrates' entire argument is based on the premise that he does not believe, which significantly weakened the credibility of his argument. This strategy makes
People will do something bad for now, such as taking medicine, are for long-term happiness, such as health. The action itself may be reluctant, but the result of the action is good. People did not act for action, but act for some purpose, and the goal must be good and beneficial for people. Otherwise, human beings would not take actions that cannot lead to happiness. Thus, no one willingly does wrong (Plato, Gorgias, 467c-468d). When consequences of short-term happiness behaviors conflict with long-term happiness, for example, when immediate pleasure, such as drug abuse, could cause long-term suffering, the long-term hedonist believes that once wise people recognize this situation, they will certainly give up the immediate happiness, and the pursuit of long-term happiness, to avoid long-term pain. Socrates believed that people must always choose more happiness and less pain. If happiness is to be compared with pain, as long as happiness is greater than pain, no matter immediate or future, people will undoubtedly choose those behaviors that will bring happiness; but if it is more painful than happiness, then people will avoid those actions (Plato, Protagoras, 356b-c). Socrates had demonstrated that happiness is good and pain is evil, on the premise that the pursuit of happiness and the avoidance of suffering are human nature. People will avoid pain which means they will avoid evil;