Aristotle and Searle on Desirable Action: Two Contrasting Analysis

The paper delves into the conditions under which an action can be deemed desirable, focusing on two contrasting models proposed by Aristotle and John Searle. While Aristotle emphasizes reason and virtue as central to the desirability of action, his framework ultimately remains desire-centric. In contrast, Searle advances a model of desire-independent action, arguing that the Aristotelian view renders actions susceptible to incontinence. Building on this debate, we contend that continent actions are desirable not merely because they are desire-independent, but also due to their normative grounding. We further argue that the normativity of action should be conceived as an imperative, rather than being reducible to mere rationality of action.