The Cardinal Virtues: Prudence
Choosing the correct action in pursuit of the Good.
This a continuation of our articles on virtue. See Part 1 here. This article is based on Mortimer Adler’s article on “Prudence” in The Great Ideas.
Definition of Prudence
Prudence is using practical reason to see the true good in every circumstance and to choose the correct action.
Similar virtues: Chastity & Practical Wisdom.
Associated Vices: Lust & Impulsivity.
Of the Cardinal Virtues, Prudence is the least intellectual, yet the most experiential. It is as much moral as it is academic. Someone may be intellectually gifted, able to solve the riddles of science, yet unwilling to pursue the good in their everyday life.
Aristotle declared: “that practical wisdom is not scientific knowledge is evident by the fact that while young men become geometricians and mathematicians and wise in matters like these, it is thought that a young man of practical wisdoms cannot be found.” He continued “the reason that such wisdom is concerned not only with universals but with particulars, which become familiar from experience, but a young man has no experience, for it is length of time that gives experience.”
Since prudence is not purely intellectual, it is thereby not entirely relegated to the intelligent. A simple farmer often has far more practical wisdom than a college professor. To this point, the intellectual often struggles with practical wisdom.
Intelligence is often tied to rationality, or the ability to think through potential outcomes and select the appropriate course. In fact, Aristotle argues that prudence involves deliberation about potential outcomes, but more focused on the practical than the theoretical. For the intelligent person, they can often rationalize something that is obviously not prudent, yet achieves their own selfish desire. In this sense, their rationality betrays them by justifying immoral actions.
History is replete with these examples, including some current cases. During a recent Supreme Court confirmation hearing, a future Supreme Court justice, someone who should be the pinnacle of prudence, was unwilling to define the term “woman.” The most basic of human identities was beyond the ability, or more likely the fortitude, of this justice to define. Yet, while this justice was unwilling to define something that even a child understands, she was being lauded for being…a woman.
Legalistic or Philosophical?
Legal codes, from Exodus to the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, attempt to teach prudence through regulation. They imply that you should do this by choosing not to do that. This works well when facing known situations. If you know what not to do, then it is implied what you are allowed to do.
Unfortunately, this legal framework can break down when facing novel situations. What happens when there is no established legal precedent? What is one to do then? This is why prudence is seeking true good in every circumstance, not just the correct answer. If one seeks the good, then there may be a best answer for the unknown.
The moral character of prudence is anchored in the pursuit of true good. Prudence is not just about justice, but also mercy. Aristotle makes the distinction that “virtue makes us aim at the right end, and practical wisdom makes us take the right means.” In one instance the correct action may be punishment in order to teach a moral, but in the next instance the correct action may be mercy. Finding this balance is at the heart of prudence, and the heart of virtue, itself.
Social Constructions of Morality
Prudence is possible as long as we can all agree on the true good. The problem is when the ultimate good is in flux. How is one to choose the correct action if the ultimate good is a moving target?
This is what we are seeing in our current culture. Is the ultimate good justice for all? Or equality of outcomes? Is it climate protection? Or economic prosperity?
The heart of prudence is understanding how you see the world. This is where social constructions play a vital role. Two academics (Berger & Luckmann) in the 1960s wrote a book called The Social Construction of Reality. They explained how two different constructions of reality could lead to two different concepts of right action.
Some people have misunderstood this concept to form ridiculous explanations such as “my truth” and “my lived experience,” but that is not at all what the authors intended. Berger & Luckmann wrote that how one views the world is based on their construct of how the world works. The correct action can only be understood through this construct. But this is where it gets interesting. The concept of social construction hinges on the size of the construction. A large cultural construction, such as organized religion, is inherently stable, and leads to a prudent action based on a robust understanding of the true good. An individual construction changes with every new piece of information, hence, is inherently unstable, and likely unable to handle novel situations.
This is why people living with “my truth” are often unstable, because an individual cannot anticipate every new situation; whereas a person rooted in thousands of years of myths and fables, has built a more stable construction of reality, even if they have not personally experienced those situations.
Associated Vices
There are two primary vices associated with Prudence: Lust and Impulsivity.
Lust is the intense desire for sexual intimacy, power, or money.
Impulsivity is the willful disregard of council and forethought.
As we can see, the opposite of the prudent man would be the fool, the one who rushes into situations with little regard for the potential outcomes. It is important to understand that all of us have played the fool at some point. Young children are impulsive, often acting with no thought of consequences.
As we age, we hopefully mature by learning from our mistakes and developing prudence; but, the mark of true maturity is learning from others’ mistakes, developing prudence without all of the painful consequences. Unfortunately, there are some who take pride in impulsivity, gleefully wading into deep waters with no regard for their future selves. The Great Books are full of these examples, from the lustful Paris (The Iliad) to the impulsive King Laius and Queen Jocasta (Oedipus’s Tragedies).
The Great Books
The Great Books will show us that the correlation between prudence and intelligence is non-existent, or better yet, may be pointing in the opposite direction. Odysseus is the most cunning of the Greeks, yet he is not always the most prudent. Many of his adventures are the consequences of poor decisions. It is not the brilliant Ivan who is Dostoyevsky’s hero in The Brothers Karamazov, but the ‘naive’ Alyosha. It is not the stately Anna Karenina who is Tolstoy’s heroine, yet the ‘simple’ Kitty.
The point of reading great literature is to learn lessons from the characters, so you do not have to make the same mistakes. Learn from Aesop’s Fables. Listen to the wisdom of Aristotle’s Ethics. Understand the morals being taught by Plutarch’s Lives.
With that said, just reading these books will not make the student more prudent. If that were the case, our PhDs would be the philosopher kings that Plato longed for. What we see in reality is that the classicist professor likely has far less practical wisdom than the farmer. There should be no hubris in having read the Great Books. There should be humility is knowing that we are only scratching the tip of the iceberg of how to live a virtuous life. Don’t tell me what books you have read, show me what lessons you have learned.
All of this comes back to our ultimate good. If we are reading as a way to understand the world and our place in it, then we are moving in the right direction. If we know our ultimate good: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength and love your neighbor as yourself,” then we are better equipped to face the novel situations in our lives. If we are attempting to build a social construction based on our own lived experiences, then prudence will be ever fleeting.