RESPONSIBILITY

When people talk about freedom, what is being emphasized is how a person is free. However, for
Sartre, when there is freedom, there is responsibility. We have established that the person is
freedom, and that is, he/she cannot escape from freedom, he/she cannot do away with
responsibility. The absolute responsibility of the person is freedom itself.

Sartre defines responsibility as the "consciousness (of) being the incontestable author of an event or
an object (Sartre, 1993). When a person is free, the person is also responsible. Whatever the person
chooses, he/she is the author of the choice. For instance, Laura stays at home because she does not
want to get infected with the virus. Laura's choice to stay is a manifestation that she is free. Is she
free when, in fact, there is a policy to stay at home? Of course, she is free because she chooses to
stay or to follow the policy. She is the author now of her choice to stay at home. In other words, her
responsibility is her free choice. If she owns her choice and does not deny that she truly is free to
make such a decision, she is responsible.

To understand the concept of responsibility is to recognize freedom. For this reason, Sartre argues
that the person is condemned to be free. He explains that when a person chooses, he/she chooses
himself/herself because, as implied earlier, the choices make the person what he/she is. Sartre adds
that when "man chooses his own self, we mean that every one of us does likewise; but we also mean
that he also chooses all men in making this choice." Everyone wants to choose the good, not evil,
which cannot be good without being good for all. This means therefore that the person
consequently carries the load of the world. Sartre says,

Furthermore, this absolute responsibility is not resignation; it is simply the logical

requirement of the consequences of freedom. What happens to me happens through
me, and I can neither affect myself with it nor revolt against it nor resign myself to it.

Moreover, everything that happens to me is mine. (Sartre, 1965)

Responsibility is being the owner of one's choice. Many clamors for freedom or demand that they
should be given absolute freedom. However, we forget that being free comes with responsibility.
Some people, however, disown their freedom, thereby neglecting their responsibility. They forget
that their choices have consequences.

Temperance

Temperance is the habit of moderation in the use of pleasurable things. Again, there are many associated
specific virtues, some of which are somewhat unfamiliar to modern ears. For example, modern readers are likely
to think of frugality or sobriety; they might not think of dignity (appropriate reserve-hence moderating the
pleasure of emotional expressions) or meekness (enduring injury with patience), or propriety (meeting social
standards in conduct or speech). The difficulty for modern readers (other than just the shifting meanings of
specific terms used by the Scholastic philosophers of the Middle Ages) has to do with the very broad way of
construing “pleasurable things” in the definition of temperance. Thus, meekness is an example of temperance
because it involves the habit of moderating one’s natural wish to revenge injury, and thus to forego at least some
of the pleasure that would arise in seeking such vengeance.

Summary of Cardinal Virtues

The cardinal virtues are each category or sets of related specific virtues, and they are generally moral
virtues, but they are also intellectual virtues, in that practical wisdom demands each of these virtues
in order to engage in virtuous action in a particular set of circumstances here and now.

To give a more intuitive feel for how these virtues relate to intellect, let us consider an intellectual
activity (in the modern sense), such as earning a degree, and then consider how the virtues relate to
that activity. Fortitude is likely obvious to anyone who has attempted any difficult undertaking, such
as earning a degree. There are many difficulties that arise during a degree program, which must be
endured. Specifically, one must have fortitude in order to work through the intellectual difficulties
inherent in trying to understand a complicated topic.

Justice might also be clear; obviously, one must try to be honest and fair in taking exams, to fairly
give credit where it is due (e.g., to sources in writing a term paper), and so on. Temperance is critical
in the obvious sense that studying and other work associated with learning limit the pleasurable
activities that one might otherwise be engaged in, but also in all the things that one must do to meet
the requirements of getting a degree, such as treating instructors with respect even when you are
frustrated, and so on.

Finally, prudence (the “master virtue” of this set) is involved in nearly every aspect of learning in
order to get a degree—docility, for example, as the virtue of being open to being taught by authors
who have worked in the discipline, or inventiveness in bringing an appropriate creativity to
assignments, rather than making it just a copy of what has come before.

The critical point of this example is simply that these virtues, though moral, are also intellectual
precisely because of the very tight relation between the appetitive and the intellectual in all human
action. Thus, all human action, to be good, requires the combination of virtues, and practical wisdom
is the ability to see (via the combination of the virtues) what action is best in the current
circumstances. As we have previously described, human flourishing in the A-T view consists of living
well (i.e., virtuously). Hence, the cardinal virtues are central to human flourishing.

Aristotle’s Three Types of Souls

Aristotle disagreed with Plato that the soul is separable. For him, the soul and the body are
substantially united. There is no dichotomy between the two, for none cannot talk about the soul
apart from the body or talk about the body apart from the soul (Stumpf & Fieser, 2012). Aristotle
explained in detail his view on man when he explained its biological and psychological aspects. The
word soul is an English translation of the Greek word psyche. Hence, for him, the soul is the source
of life.

What gives life to a body? For Aristotle, all bodies, living or not, are a combination of the primary
elements. The body is not the principle of life, for it is always in potentiality. It needs a form to be in
actuality. By actuality, we mean it is alive. When the body is alive, it will then be able to perform its
functions. Like a cellphone, if it is not charged, it would not do its functions.
The soul then is the form of the organized body. For Aristotle, anything that lives has a soul. Does
this mean that animals and plants also have souls? Yes. Not only humans have souls. Aristotle
identified three kinds of souls found in plants, animals, and man. These three kinds of souls are
characterized as vegetative, sensitive, and rational. They are modeled according to the various
capacities of the body.

What do we mean by vegetative souls? Plants can grow, reproduce, and feed themselves. That is
why the living soul is found in them. It does not share the higher types of souls, for it cannot feel and
think. On the other hand, the sensitive soul shares with the vegetative soul, for it is also capable of
growing, feeding, and reproducing. Moreover, what makes it different is that it is also capable of
sensing or feeling. A sensitive being possesses the appetite where desire, anger, and pain are
experienced (Melchert, 1999). Meanwhile, the rational soul shares with the other lower souls, i.e.,
vegetative and sensitive. It has the capacity for scientific thoughts, for it can distinguish various
things. With this capacity, it analyzes and understands the relationship of things. Moreover, aside
from the scientific thoughts, it also deliberates and discovers the truth of the nature of things and
the guidelines for human behavior (Stumpf & Fieser, 2012). Aristotle believed then that there must
be a connection between the mind and the soul. It is from this connection that consciousness and
self-awareness arise.

RESPONSIBILITY

When people talk about freedom, what is being emphasized is how a person is free. However, for
Sartre, when there is freedom, there is responsibility. We have established that the person is
freedom, and that is, he/she cannot escape from freedom, he/she cannot do away with
responsibility. The absolute responsibility of the person is freedom itself.

Sartre defines responsibility as the "consciousness (of) being the incontestable author of an event or
an object (Sartre, 1993). When a person is free, the person is also responsible. Whatever the person
chooses, he/she is the author of the choice. For instance, Laura stays at home because she does not
want to get infected with the virus. Laura's choice to stay is a manifestation that she is free. Is she
free when, in fact, there is a policy to stay at home? Of course, she is free because she chooses to
stay or to follow the policy. She is the author now of her choice to stay at home. In other words, her
responsibility is her free choice. If she owns her choice and does not deny that she truly is free to
make such a decision, she is responsible.

To understand the concept of responsibility is to recognize freedom. For this reason, Sartre argues
that the person is condemned to be free. He explains that when a person chooses, he/she chooses
himself/herself because, as implied earlier, the choices make the person what he/she is. Sartre adds
that when "man chooses his own self, we mean that every one of us does likewise; but we also mean
that he also chooses all men in making this choice." Everyone wants to choose the good, not evil,
which cannot be good without being good for all. This means therefore that the person
consequently carries the load of the world. Sartre says,

Furthermore, this absolute responsibility is not resignation; it is simply the logical

requirement of the consequences of freedom. What happens to me happens through me, and I can
neither affect myself with it nor revolt against it nor resign myself to it.

Moreover, everything that happens to me is mine. (Sartre, 1965)

Responsibility is being the owner of one's choice. Many clamor for freedom or demand that they
should be given absolute freedom. However, we forget that being free comes with responsibility.
Some people, however, disown their freedom, thereby neglecting their responsibility. They forget
that their choices have consequences.

Summary of Cardinal Virtues

As noted above, the cardinal virtues are each categories or sets of related specific virtues, and as we
noted above, they are generally moral virtues, but they are also intellectual virtues, in that practical
wisdom demands each of these virtues in order to engage in virtuous action in a particular set of
circumstances here and now.

To give a more intuitive feel for how these virtues relate to intellect, let us consider an intellectual
activity (in the modern sense), such as earning a degree, and then consider how the virtues relate to
that activity. Fortitude is likely obvious to anyone who has attempted any difficult undertaking, such
as earning a degree. There are many difficulties that arise during a degree program, which must be
endured. Specifically, one must have fortitude in order to work through the intellectual difficulties
inherent in trying to understand a complicated topic. Justice might also be pretty clear; obviously,
one must try to be honest and fair in taking
exams, to fairly give credit where it is due (e.g., to sources in writing a term paper), and so on.
Temperance is critical in the obvious sense that studying and other work associated with learning
limit the pleasurable activities that one might otherwise be engaged in, but also in all the things that
one must do to meet the requirements of getting a degree, such as treating instructors with respect
even when you are frustrated,
and so on. Finally, prudence (the “master virtue” of this set) is involved in nearly every aspect of
learning in order to get a degree—docility, for example, as the virtue of being open to being taught
by authors who have worked in the discipline, or inventiveness in bringing an appropriate creativity
to assignments, rather than making it just a copy of what has come before.

The critical point of this example is simply that these virtues, though moral, are also intellectual
precisely because of the very tight relation between the appetitive and the intellectual in all human
action. Thus, all human action, to be good, requires the combination of virtues, and practical wisdom
is the ability to see (via the combination of the virtues) what action is best in the current
circumstances. As we have previously described, human flourishing in the A-T view consists of living
well (i.e., virtuously). Hence, the cardinal virtues are central to human flourishing.