Is true temperance about resisting desire or simply desiring the right things?
Most people view temperance as a battle of willpower against temptation. However, ancient philosophers argued that true virtue isn't about the struggle of self-control, but about reshaping your character so that unwise desires vanish entirely. It is the difference between a city with good laws and one with good citizens.
While modern usage often equates temperance with simple self-restraint or teetotalism, the classical distinction between temperance and self-control is profound. Aristotle suggested that a person lacking self-control is like a city with good laws that are never enforced, whereas a temperate person has shaped their character so that their desires are inherently proper. In this view, temperance is a state of character—a habit acquired through practice—where the appetites are in harmony with reason.
This philosophical nuance extends to the very nature of pleasure. Thomas Aquinas argued that temperance does not require shunning all pleasure, but rather avoiding that which is immoderate or contrary to reason, such as the 'concupiscence of touch.' Similarly, Michel de Montaigne viewed temperance not as a scourge of pleasure, but as its 'seasoning,' enhancing the enjoyment of life through moderation. Even the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius saw it as the rational faculty's ability to remain unoverpowered by the senses.
The concept also carries significant weight in global traditions. In Buddhism, the Buddha’s 'Middle Way' advocates for moderation between sensual indulgence and self-mortification, a principle reflected in the Noble Eightfold Path. In Western thought, it remains a cardinal virtue, appearing in the works of Plato, Kant, and Darwin. While Immanuel Kant warned that a 'coolness' in a villain could make them more dangerous, he nonetheless saw the cultivation of such moderation as essential to human potential.
Source: Temperance (virtue)
