To asses this situation as Aristotle would, we must look at his writings on voluntary and involuntary actions. In Aristotle’s writings he states that voluntary and involuntary action can be distinguished by several different factors. The first of these factors is the virtue of the agent, which is defined as the alignment of ones passions and their actions (pg. 307). Virtue is also concerned with praise and blame that is bestowed on the agent after the repercussions of their actions (pg. 307). Aristotle sates that virtue cannot be fundamentally decided. It carries from situation to situation. In the situation stated above, Aristotle would asses all the factors that drove Taneah to make this decision, though in the end he would say that her passion drove her beyond was is fundamentally virtuous. This does not mean that Taneah herself was not virtuous, …show more content…
He describes choice as to be voluntary but not the same thing as the voluntary (pg. 310). Choice is beyond the irrational. Taneah’s decision was driven by passion not by rational thought. Aristotle would say that her action was beyond choice but was her demanded by her humanity (pg. 311). In addition to value and choice Aristotle considers deliberation as a factor that affects involuntary and voluntary action. He states that no one has the ability to deliberate about their external material universe (pg. 312). We can only deliberate about what is in our own power
Deliberation is used when things are uncertain or obscure. We ask for help in deliberation when we find our self not being equal to the decision. We deliberate about possible things, things that we are able to bring by our own efforts (pg. 312). In Taneah’s situation, she did not deliberate at all. She did not give the time or the energy to validate her actions with deliberation. Aristotle states this happens with the moving principle is moved back to the core desires of the person deliberating (pg.