पृष्ठ 135 / 734

Moreover, testimony seems to be borne to these positions both

privately by individuals, and by law-givers too, in that they

chastise and punish those who do wrong (unless they do so on

compulsion, or by reason of ignorance which is not self-caused),

while they honour those who act rightly, under the notion of

being likely to encourage the latter and restrain the former. But

such things as are not in our own power, i.e. not voluntary, no

one thinks of encouraging us to do, knowing it to be of no avail

for one to have been persuaded not to be hot (for instance), or

feel pain, or be hungry, and so forth, because we shall have

those sensations all the same.

And what makes the case stronger is this: that they chastise for

the very fact of ignorance, when it is thought to be self-caused;

to the drunken, for instance, penalties are double, because the

origination in such case lies in a man's own self: for he might

have helped getting drunk, and this is the cause of his

ignorance.