The Habitus of Choice

0Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This chapter deals with Aristotle’s, Aquinas’s and John Duns Scotus’s doctrines of habitus, and their relation with the freedom of habituated agents. Even if the word habitus is close to the idea of habit, it is not the same thing. Aristotle describes habitus as an acquired reflex, a mediation between potency and act. In the case of science, the habitus is not only a memory of past knowledge, but also a condition rendering new acts of knowledge possible. What about practical habitus? Aristotle defines virtue as the habitus of decision (hexis proairetikè): it is an art of aiming well. Does it mean that our virtues (and vices) prevent us from choosing? On the contrary, Aristotle maintains that we can act against our habits, even if it is unusual and difficult. Since Aquinas identifies decision with an act of free will, he maintains that, even if our habitus become a second nature, in the long run they are subject to our will; we can use them when we want. Habitus are therefore constituents of freedom, and not contrary to it. Duns Scotus emphasizes a new definition of freedom as a self-motion of the will. For him, the question becomes: is the habitus an active principle which competes with the will and determines it action? For Scotus, the habitus remains a partial cause of the action, along with our will. It enables our free action to be more intense and efficient.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Boulnois, O. (2018). The Habitus of Choice. In Historical-Analytical Studies on Nature, Mind and Action (Vol. 7, pp. 25–45). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00235-0_2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free