From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

lets talk prudence

new sections[edit]

I added some sections based on this book:
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)


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)


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

Precautionary saving[edit]

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[edit]

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. (talk) 06:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC)