Talk:Prudence

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics / Religion / Medieval Mid‑importance

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.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Philosophy of religion
	Medieval philosophy

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

[edit]

lets talk prudence

new sections[edit]

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)[reply]

imprudence[edit]

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)[reply]

=====Jurisprudence==========[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.68.151.108.107 (talk) 06:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

should a merge ever be considered with the phronesis article?[edit]

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

what do the mirror and snake symbolize?[edit]

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

Harrington ?[edit]

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)[reply]