Talk:Prudence

Untitled

lets talk prudence - 194.133.122.191 (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2004 (UTC)

new sections

I added some sections based on this book: http://www.amazon.com/Four-Cardinal-Virtues-Josef-Pieper/dp/0268001030
Four Cardinal Virtues: Theology (Paperback)
by Josef Pieper (Author)
Publisher: University of Notre Dame Press (March 31, 1990)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0268001030
ISBN-13: 978-0268001032
--Nino Gonzales 12:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

imprudence

We should write about the "Four Modes of Imprudence." According to Pieper, there are four specific means to imprudence: thoughtlessness, irresoluteness, cunning, and covetness. Thoughtlessness is acting without thinking, whereas irresoluteness is thinking without acting. Cunning is a mode where your own best interests (compared to simplicity of expression), and covetness is self preservation to insure your own importance and status. --AngrySci (talk) 18:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Jurisprudence

Can also talk about the topic of "Jurisprudence", which means "legal philosophy" or "philosophy of law" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.49.177.70 (talk) 12:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Precautionary saving

The section Prudence#Prudence in economics and finance should link to a 'Main' article on Precautionary saving. But the Precautionary saving article does not yet exist. Rinconsoleao (talk) 08:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Needs a philosophy student

Maya Angelou said Courage is the most important virtue (by enabling reliable virtuosity), so I thought I'd look up the virtues.

Imprudence is easy to identify eventually (bad results). Prudence, as stated in the article, is too easy to argue against; foresight is knowing the future. Since the future is uncertain, prudence seems to be good-gambling. If an action is supremely reasonable, but somehow turns out badly, this article says it was imprudent. Prudence seems to require omniscience. Random chance, even with reasonable estimation, is not a virtue. Avoiding imprudent action would be doing practically nothing, and apparent prudence would be fortune-telling until tested.

If the article frames prudence correctly, it needs some more philosophical arguments. Like Abelard who argued moral actions should be judged by intent, not results ("I try to be good, therefore I am good"). Maybe some physics theories, determinism (current states bringing the inevitable, or maybe fate) and quantum uncertainty. Or a section on why it's problematic. Gimme somewhere to take the idea of prudence.68.151.108.107 (talk) 06:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

should a merge ever be considered with the phronesis article?

Question above.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:23, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

what do the mirror and snake symbolize?

article does not make it clear 86.142.220.21 (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Harrington ?

James Harrington uses the word to describe the structure of government — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.145.174 (talk) 21:04, 20 December 2019 (UTC)