Weakness of will is “akrasia” or incontinence, not doing what we know is good for us or doing what we know is not good for us (Arrington 86). An example of this definition can be described in a scenario where a girl goes on a strict diet to lose ten kilos. He has lost a total of five kilos and is considering whether to reward himself with dinner and cheesecake at the Cheesecake Factory ruining his progress towards the net loss of five kilos or continue following his strict diet by working hard to reach his goal of lose ten kilos. . This interpretation of weakness of will concerned two of the most influential philosophers of our time, Socrates and Aristotle. Socrates on the one hand believed that akrasia could never occur because it contradicts his philosophy of his claim of ignorance. On the other hand, Aristotle opposes Socrates by explaining the weakness of the will as having knowledge in two different and distinct ways and objects to Socrates' rejection. Some scholars believe that there are multiple ideas between each topic, for example Aristotle has an agreement with Socrates, but we will stick to the latter. Which topic is most applicable? Between the two theories, I will analyze which reasoning is more idealistic. Socrates explains that akrasia is not possible through his reasoning that doing something negative causes ignorance. Socrates explains that we never unconsciously do what is bad (Aristotle on the weakness of the will). Ultimately, Socrates states that if one knows the good, he will pursue it and that if one does what is wrong, he does so involuntarily out of ignorance (Arrington 18). When Socrates reasons and expresses his explanation in the Protagoras and Meno, the question of the weakness of the will and its reason is raised...... middle of paper ......and what brings pleasure. That person made a choice and I firmly believe that actions can be voluntary and feelings can play a role in action as Aristotle believes. Subsequently, Socrates and Aristotle each had their own concepts for their approach to weakness of will and each had their own differences. Weakness of will in general is not moral, nor is it cruel. The difference between an incontinent person who knows what is right and strives for it but chooses pleasure versus an intemperate person who persistently seeks excessive pleasure (Kemerling). I support Aristotle's view rather than Socrates' view because it is more practical in human decision making when we are weak about our decisions, unlike Socrates' belief that this is not possible due to ignorance because I believe we also know when there are bad actions of our decisions and which are not the result of ignorance.