The explanation of why strong leaders or powerful tyrants perform punishment and execution was interesting. They do not will the punishment itself but does it for the sake of the state. This caught my attention because it connects back to the servile and leisure acts.

Most people do not will an action itself but they will do that action for the “sake of which they act as they do.” The result of this action represents the true purpose and the aim. For example, we do not take medicine for its own sake but we take it in order to improve our health. In other words, if a man acts with purpose, he does not will the act but wills the purpose of the act. Another example is the act of exercising. We do not exercise because it is good for its own sake but because it increases our health. Ultimately, this argument is also applicable to the powerful tyrants. They face situations where they had to punish and execute someone for the good of the state. In this situation, he does the action (punishment) for the sake of the state. Therefore, these tyrants do not posses true power because they still perform involuntary actions.

This argument connects back to the Aristotle’s explanation about servile and leisure acts.  The idea that we do actions for the sake of another is similar. He says that we do servile activities that are for the sake of others in order to do our leisure activities that we truly enjoy. Therefore, in order to fulfill your purpose, sometimes you need to perform involuntary and servile acts. The parallelism in these two arguments was very interesting.