自制与不能自制这两个概念是伦理学中十分重要的两个概念，对他们的讨论贯穿着整个西方哲学史。对这个问题的首次正式讨论出现在《普罗塔戈拉》中，苏格拉底对不自制的存在进行了否定。亚里士多德则在苏格拉底和柏拉图的基础上对这个问题进行了进一步的讨论，并在《尼各马克伦理学》中将这个问题作为一个重要问题，专门用一卷进行了说明。亚里士多德一方面继承了苏格拉底的理性主义传统，认为人是理性的动物，坚信真正的知识能够指导人选择正确的行为，同时又对知识进行了细分，他并未像苏格拉底那样完全否定不自制的存在，而是认为人很有可能因为欲望的影响做出不自制的行为。到底应该如何处理知识和欲望之间的关系，以及到底是知识还是欲望才是驱动一个行为发生的根本因素，就成为了对亚氏自制问题讨论的关键。

后世对这一问题的讨论分为两条路径，一条是传统解释，他们认为理性是一个行动的真正动力，实践三段论的结果就是一个行动。但是传统解释对于这个问题解释实际上否定了真正的不自制的存在。非传统解释则更倾向于从欲望的角度对这个问题作出解释。

通过对亚氏文本的研究，在细致梳理这两种解释的基础上，我们发现非传统解释尤其是阿尔弗雷德·米利的解释是与亚里士多德本人的思想更为贴近的。所以本文以阿尔弗雷德·米利对亚里士多德的研究为基础，结合亚里士多德对灵魂内部构成尤其是欲望的分类对不自制问题作出一个讨论，探究自制和不自制现象出现的根本原因，从而为我们克服不自制，并达到自制，最后过上一种幸福生活提供一种可能的参考和解决方案。

The concepts of continence and incontinence are very important in ethics, and their discussion runs through the whole history of Western philosophy. The first formal discussion of this problem occurs in Protagoras, where Socrates denies the existence of incontinence. Aristotle further discussed this issue on the basis of Socrates and Plato, and devoted a volume to this issue as an important issue in Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle on the one hand, inherited the traditional rationalism of the Socrates, that man is a rational animal, firmly believe that real knowledge is to be able to guide people to select the correct behavior, but the knowledge for segmentation, therefore he has not completely deny the existence of the incontinence, but think it is possible for people  because of the influence of the desire. How to deal with the relationship between knowledge and desire, and whether knowledge or desire is the fundamental factor driving the occurrence of a behavior, has become the key to discuss the problem of continence.

Later discussions on this issue can be divided into two paths, one is the traditional interpretation, they believe that reason is the real motive force of an action, the result of practical syllogism is an action. But the traditional interpretation denies the existence of true incontinence. Non-traditional interpretation tend to explain the problem in terms of desire.

Through the study of Aristotle's text, on the basis of the careful sorting of these two interpretations, we find that the non-traditional interpretation, especially Alfred Mele's interpretation, is closer to Aristotle himself. So this article is based on Alfred Mele`s study of Aristotle, according to Aristotle's soul internal composition especially the classification of the desire to make a discussion, exploring continence and the root cause of incontinence phenomenon, thus for us to overcome incontinence, and continence, and finally live a happy life.