- A person can only do an unjust or just act if they do so voluntarily.
- If you do an unjust act involuntarily (check out Aristotle's definition of this), you might be blamed—but not considered 100% unjust.
- A quick recap of involuntary action: 1) when a person acts in ignorance; 2) when the action is not his choice; 3) when the action is forced.
- There are also incidental actions—things we do not intend to be just or unjust, but they end up being so.
- Aristotle says that what is voluntary is something deliberated on beforehand.
- He includes as involuntary the things we do in ignorance and under ignorance.
- These are three: 1) when a person doesn't realize that he'll cause harm or use a harmful instrument; 2) when the action isn't aimed at a particular person; 3) the "end" is unexpected.
- If in any of these cases, the person involuntarily acts unjustly and causes harm—it isn't what he intended. This can only be called error.
- If there's pre-meditation (i.e. deliberation), then the act is properly unjust. And if we harm someone intentionally but without deliberation, it's still unjust.
- But if these acts of injustice don't come about because of wickedness and conscious choice, the doer is not an unjust person.
- Aristotle says that in matters of judgment, it's not the result that we dispute. If there's a body lying on the ground in a pool of blood, we pretty much know that we've got a violent death.
- The real thing at issue is who is at fault. What is the just action that will set things right?
- When a person harms by choice, he behaves unjustly. And when that person seeks to gain more of anything through an unjust act, he actually becomes unjust.
- On the other side of the spectrum, a person may be called just if he performs just acts voluntarily.
- Aristotle addresses forgiveness as well. We can forgive involuntary things (or not).
- If they are done without understanding, they might be forgiven. If done in a "passion," they might not be forgiven.