Book 7
9
(4) Again, one may also study the cause of Unrestraint scientifically,i.e., in this case, psychologically: lit. with reference to its nature. Cf. 8.1.6, 9.7.2, 9.9.7. thus: In a practical syllogism, the major premise is an opinion, while the minor premise deals with particular things, which are the province of perception. Now when the two premises are combined, just as in theoretic reasoning the mind is compelled to affirm the resulting conclusion, so in the case of practical premises you are forced at once to do it. For example, given the premises All sweet things ought to be tasted and Yonder thing is sweet—a particular instance of the general class—, you are bound, if able and not prevented, immediately to taste the thing.
10
When therefore there is present in the mind on the one hand a universal judgement forbidding you to taste and on the other hand a universal judgement saying All sweet things are pleasant, and a minor premise Yonder thing is sweet (and it is this minor premise that is activei.e., determines action ( Ross).) , and when desire is present at the same time, then, though the former universal judgement says Avoid that thing, the desire leads you to it (since desire can put the various parts of the body in motion). Thus it comes about that when men fail in self-restraint, they act in a sense under the influence of a principle or opinion, but an opinion not in itself but only accidentally opposed to the right principle
11
(for it is the desire, and not the opinion, that is really opposed). Hence the lower animals cannot be called unrestrained, if only for the reason that they have no power of forming universal concepts, but only mental images and memories of particular things.
12
If we ask how the unrestrained man’s ignorance is dissipated and he returns to a state of knowledge, the explanation is the same as in the case of drunkenness and sleep, and is not peculiar to failure of self-restraint. We must go for it to physiology.
