Incontinence (n.) is not being satisfied with the enjoyment of one love.
Incontinence (n.) drags about not knowledge proper but perceptual knowledge — so Socrates turns out, in a way, to be right.
Incontinence (n.) is a paralysed soul: like a limb that swings left when you will it right, its impulses move against your intention.
Incontinence (n.) can be good: Neoptolemus is praised for abandoning the lie Odysseus talked him into, because the lie pained him.
Incontinence (n.) is acting under the influence, in a sense, of a rule: "everything sweet is pleasant; this is sweet" — and appetite seizes the conclusion.
Incontinence (n.) can run in the family: a son tried for beating his father pleaded "Why, he did so to his own father" — and was acquitted, the judges blaming nature.
Incontinence (n.) does not exist, said Socrates — it would be strange if knowledge could be mastered and dragged about like a slave; whoever acts against the best does so from ignorance.
Incontinence (n.) is knowing like a sleeper knows: he possesses the knowledge of right but does not operate with it — as sleepers, knowing better, do and suffer disgusting things in their dreams.
Incontinence (n.) of the sudden kind can be headed off by forethought: tell yourself beforehand "There will come a pretty woman, so one must repress oneself", and you will not be moved at all.
Incontinence (n.) of anger is less disgraceful than incontinence of appetite: the angry man is conquered, in a sense, by argument; the appetitive man by appetite alone.