This book simply by St Augustine contains many philosophical arguments. St Augustine was a Latin speaking philosopher born about what is now modern-day Algeria. Having been one of the most productive philosophers with hundreds of making it through works caused by him (having survived the passage of time).
The book In Free choice of the will consists of may divine references with the central disagreement concerning totally free will being a gift by god, a present which leads to humans becoming evil because of their own natural flaws. Totally free will can be described as large idea in the book. We are critically examining Augustine’s argument that a brain that is in charge, one that owns virtue, may not be made a slave to inordinate desire by anything at all equal or superior to it, because these kinds of a thing can be just, or by whatever inferior to it, because such some thing would be as well weak’1.
I will be looking at the weaknesses and strengths on this argument and conclude how convincing his argument is definitely. Augustine’s initially argument regarding the mind being made a slave to excessive desire contains many imperfections its states Each mind possesses the same degree of quality and any thing that would look at such a specific thing will have decreased from proper rights and become weaker 2(originally explained by Evodius but Augustine agrees to it) through this he is essentially saying that any kind of mind looking to enslave one more mind to the inordinate desire will have turn into unjust in addition to the process less strong meaning that cannot control the excellent mind.
The first issue with this debate is the philosophy that all minds posses a similar degree of quality, this idea is completely incorrect as it can be illogical to assume that almost all humans will be intellectually equivalent. The fact the foundation of the argument is usually wrong can serve to debase the entire debate as it is a paramount (and erroneous) idea upon which the argument is created. Augustine’s debate states a Mind cannot be enslaved simply by something similar or better than it since that factor would be just 3 Besides this affirmation destroy his previous idea that all thoughts are equal it also consists of many problems on its own.
Firstly its takes on that a brain that is superior would be merely this assumption contains a large number of problems. First of all it takes on that the wiser you would be the more simply you would be, this statement is fairly the opposite the better you will be the more likely you are to be capable of manipulate and scheme causing you to unjust, you can only look at politicians to determine that the even more intelligent you are the more susceptible you would be to carrying out unjust serves, so for me this assertion can be quickly refuted. It is very logical to assume that the superior brain will be more likely to try and enslave another mind for some goal or another.
Anybody can only glance at the peace between intellectual second-rate animals which do not commit a variety of nefarious acts in order to further more themselves, distinction this while using chaos amongst humans and one can begin to see that the superior head is truly less just compared to the inferior mind, humans have got pride and ambition which engenders greed and other destructive traits, they are not seen in animals and babies (both of to whom have second-rate minds) and galvanizes the idea that a remarkable mind is much less just compared to a weaker 1. The next component to his debate that an poor mind cannot enslave an exceptional mind as it will be sluggish, contains much more logic than his earlier arguments. I would not say this statement is totally correct nevertheless the notion a weak head cannot enslave a superior head is mostly accurate in my opinion as it is logical to assume that fragile cannot conquer the strong.
On the other hand to fully write off a poor minds probability of enslaving a superior mind will be foolish as many other factors take part in this process which includes emotions and circumstance, for example if a man which has a superior mind is in love with a girl who possesses an inferior brain he could still be enslaved to inordinate desire due to his take pleasure in for her which will have bended his explanation. Hence beneath some instances a fragile mind can easily over arrive a superior brain yet it could be prudent to assume that a superior mind will always have the upper hand barring exterior factors.
Finally in my opinion there exists a huge natural flaw inside the entire discussion of Augustine, I believe that pride, desire, gluttony and all other several inordinate desires are natural in individuals in general, I really do not believe that it is necessary for a mind to sway an additional into these types of desires as they already can be found within the person, it is environmental factors which in turn sway a person into experiencing these excessive desires not really people and thus I believe that Augustine’s quarrels are essentially flawed. He takes a incredibly idealistic approach to humans believing them to just corruptible because of other unjust people corrupting them.
In reality I believe (unfortunately) that individuals are more likely to feel inordinate desires due to extenuating factors that catalyze all their latent thoughts that lead to the dire consequences that are engendered by excessive desires. To conclude I believe Augustine’s arguments happen to be mediocre. Their strengths are far and few and massively outweighed by the flaws In them. His arguments when appearing reasonable and fair contain various imperceptible breaks which can be used greatly (and at times may debase his entire argument) in the case of a debate.
Based on this We would have to say that his arguments are mediocre at best and while they are to some degree convincing a witty man could see through all of them easily.
