As human beings responsibility is important to us, we need to hold people accountable for their actions in order to keep society in check. Whether or not an act was committed voluntarily or involuntarily, and whether or not the person deliberated over the act is important to take into consideration during judgment. Many philosophers have tried to justify their point of view, but very few have looked on these subjects as in depth as Aristotle. He has very clear cut views of what makes an act voluntary or involuntary. He also discusses the concept of deliberation, its importance, and what people deliberate about. His views in many ways agree with the teachings of Confucianism. Although Confucius does not actually define voluntary and involuntary he touches on deliberation and its importance. Overall it would be fair to assume that minor details aside their general principals would agree. They both understand the importance of making good choices to be good person (responsibility).
             According to Aristotle there are voluntary and involuntary acts. For an act to be involuntary the agent must contribute nothing to the act, the cause is outside of the agent. If the agent contributes anything at all to the act then it is voluntary. For instance if a man's family were taken hostage and he was told if he wanted them back alive he would have to kill somebody else, and he actually did it than the act would be voluntary. Even though he needed to kill the other person to save his family, he did not have to do it. In some cases an act can be involuntary if the person is ignorant of something. If the person is ignorant of a particular fact, such as a person ran behind a man at bat and got hit in the head when he swung. As long as the person did not see the man running out he did not mean to do it, and he could not have known it was going to happen. However, if the man is ignorant of a universal fact (common sense that all people...