Moral Wisdom or prudence may be defined as the proper connection among the end or goal of an action,the means to achieve it, and thejudgment to act upon it, such thatthe result is a morally satisfying outcome.

pRUDENCE

MORALSENTIMENT

MORALSTRENGTH

VIRTUE

VISION

DELIBERATION

JUDGEMENT

WISDOM OR PRUDENCE PERFECTS CHARACTER

It perfects moral strength by helping to making the right decisions.

Wisdom is the perfection of the various aspects of moral competence

It perfects the desire to do the good by developing a robust sense of the good life, a moral vision.

It perfects virtuous behavior by guiding it deliberatively towards the proper moral ends and means.

The General Characteristics of Wisdom

Reasoning ability

A clear, logical mind, a storehouse of infor-mation and learning, with an ability to apply these to the solution of a particular problem

Sagacity

A good understanding of themselvesand others.

Learning capacityThey attach importance to ideas;they learn from other people’s mistakes, as

well as their own;they seek out detailed information;they change their mind on the basis of experience and knowledge;they feel they can learn from others; they are not afraid to admit mistakes; they correct their mistakes, learn,

and then go on;they seek the counsel of others.

PerspicacityGood intuitions, discernment and insight;they offer solutions that are on the side ofright and truth.

Good characterThey are self-honest, considerate of others,and have genuine concern for people; theyare fair, and listen to all sides of an issue;they are modest.

Good judgment

They are sensible, and think before they act, speak or make decisions; they areable to take the long view into consideration.

5. intellectual insight, intuition, observation and discernment.

How is prudence or wisdom acquired?

1. one must have acquired a virtuous character.

2. maturity of the faculties of judgment and understanding.

3. experience in making moral deliberations and decisions.

4. an understanding of the ways of the world; a savoir-faire.

Prudence and practical reasoning isconcerned with connecting means and ends in a manner that leads togood moral outcomes.

Practical reasoning is concerned, then, with:

The end of an action

The means to an end

The decision to act, to initiate those means.

In its most general sense, wisdom andpractical reasoning are concerned with:

Vision--the ends of action

Deliberation--or the consideration ofmeans to ends.

Judgement--or decisions about when and what to do in light of some end or goal.

JUDGMENT

DELIBERATION

MORAL VISION

Judgement ischoice concerningthe best moral course of action.

Moral Vision is a sense of the good life.

Deliberation is concerned with determining the best moral means to attain a good end.

This helps to characterize the various aspectsof moral wisdom:

The person who is morally wise, then,is someone who has the proper visionof the good life, knows the best moralmeans for attaining it, and has theright character and strength of willto act upon what must be done.

Moral vision is one part of wisdomof wisdom or prudence.

JUDGMENT

DELIBERATION

MORAL VISION

Judgement ischoice concerningthe best moral course of action.

Moral Vision is concerned witharticulating a sense of thegood life.

Deliberation is concerned with determining the best moral means to attain a good end.

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

3. Thomas Sowell calls visions maps; they are cognitive, but pre-analytic --it is what we sense about the world before we have constructed any systematic reasoning about it.

Some characteristics of Moral Vision:

1. According to Aristotle it is the sense of the good life, aview of what is best in our lives, or an idea of happiness.

2. According to Plato, without moral vision one is direction-less, and interested in only satisfying our lower needs.

COSMIC VISION

PUBLIC VISION

SENSE OF THE GOOD LIFE

A Moral Vision is layered. Ittypically consists of a CosmicVision, that is, a sense of the moral order of the cosmos. It also involves a Public Vision, a sense of the common good,

themoral quality of the origin, history and direction of the society one lives in. Finally, it consists in anindividual sense of the good life, as set in the context of these other two aspects of moral vision.

Cosmic Vision

3. A myth is a narrative, and a narrative conveys certain moral qualities by:

a. the order of events in the story.b. the outcome of the story.c. the various roles agents play in the story.d. the character of the agents relative to these

roles.

1. In most cultures a cosmic vision of the world is ex-pressed primarily in terms of myths and stories.

2. A cosmic vision attempts to explain how things came tobe the way they are, and how they continue to be ordered.

God (Yahweh) creates the world out of a formless void.First light is created , then light separated from darkness.The upper waters are separated from lower waters. Dryland is separated from water. Vegetation is created bytype. Days and nights follow in ordered sequence. Thesun and the stars are created. Sea, air and land creaturesare created. Human beings are made last.

Cosmic Vision

Synopsis of Genesis Creation Story

Raven goes to a place where there’s some dirt and rocks. He tries to put them together, but they don’t stick. That Raven, he’s got a temper, so he kicked the rocks and swore because he hurt his toes. But then he had another idea. This time he mixed in some water with the rocks and dirt. He worked hard, that Raven did, and had an awful time of it. The mountains dropped off. The oceans spilled over. Sometimes he got so mad he just kicked the whole thing to pieces. Raven’s world was lumpy and bumpy, and it sure didn’t look like what he had in mind. But he was good and tired of working on it. So he said the hell with it. And that’s the way it stayed.

Cosmic VisionA Tlingit Creation Tale:

These two stories convey differentnorms and values and attitudesconcerning the origin of the cosmos.

The Genesis story conveys the ideathat the cosmos was created purposely, perfectly and imbued withgood.

The Raven story, on the other hand,suggests that the cosmos was createdhaphazardly, imperfectly, and notnecessarily imbued with either good orevil.

Given the present imperfection andsuffering in the world, the Genesismyth would suggest that it is basicallyour fault that the world has gotteninto such a situation. The Tlingit mythwould suggest that the world is already inherently flawed.

These views serve as a backgroundto how one understands oneself asa moral agent.

It is possible to reduce myths to four or five narrative types, based on:

1. the sort of conflict involved in the story.

2. the character of the opponents involved.

3. who makes the breach and who resolves it.

4. and how it gets resolved.

Cosmic Vision

DISRUPTION

CRISIS

?

RESOLUTIONStories typicallyexhibit this sort ofpattern.

Types of Narratives Romance

Tragedy

Irony

Comedy

Satire

each of these types fill out this patternin a somewhat different way.

The conflict is usually resolved positively, with good over evil.

Romance

A villain causes disruption in the order of things.

The sort of conflict is one of good versus evil.

The hero resolves the conflict by vanquishing the villain.

The conflict is resolved with the defeat or death of the tragic hero by a certain order or force.

Tragedy

The tragic hero causes the disruption in the order of things.

The sort of conflict involved is called pathos.

The conflict is resolved bynon-violence, and the opponent isoften incorporatedinto the happy ending.

Comedy

The sort of of conflict involvedis called anagnorisis.

The conflictis caused bya blocker ofhigh status.

Irony

The hero’s attempt to disrupt the order fails.

The sort of conflict involved is called sparagmos.

A relativelyweak heroattempts todisrupt theorder

The conflict endswith the order in place.

A naïve hero comes in conflictwith an existingorder.

Satire

The hero resolves the conflict by divorcing himself from the existing order and returning to a truer, more natural order.

The blocker issomeone shownto be foolish orhypocritical.

In general, each of these narrative typesexpresses an implicit norm:

For Romance or melodrama it is the good should prevail over evil, so thatreward should be given to the good, andpunishment to the vicious.

For tragedy, the norms are that loyalty,love and cooperation should prevail withina group, and only ill consequences resultfrom their violation.

For comedy, the same norms as tragedyare implied, except that the comedyshows these norms prevailing despitethe threat of their violation.

Irony, in many respects is opposed to theimplicit norms of the romance, it impliesthat there may not be a just order to things,that people are flawed, the good may notnecessarily prevail.

Thus our moral vision is conveyedby stories which visualize andconcretize implicit norms for us.

These norms serve as a backgroundto our sense of ourselves as moralagents.

The Good Life

There are several differentconceptions of the good life.

Many people think that the good lifeshould include things such as happiness, prosperity and success.

SUCCESS is accomplishment within a certain practice that affords the person a certainamount of recognition and status relative to that practice.

PROSPERITY is the achievement of a certainlevel of wealth and security.

FLOURISHING the effect upon a person of genuine mastery over a number of practices thought to be essential to the good life.

HAPPINESS asubjective feelingof contentment orjoy; sanguine temperament.

There are different senses of being asuccess and being successful.

If you accomplish any goal you set foryourself, then you might consider yourselfsuccessful relative to that goal.

However, no matter how many of thesegoals you accomplish, the goals themselvesmay not count you as being a success.

Being a successful physician, for example,may require more than accomplishingone’s own personal goals.

A successful physician must alsoaccomplish certain things as set byher colleagues, the profession and thepublic. It cannot be just subjectivelydetermined.

Happiness may be considered to be moreof a psychological state, having to do withmood and temperament. Consequently,it may not be correlated with externalevents.

Flourishing is a condition that results fromthe qualitative exercise and performance ofcertain practices.

Flourishing has more to do with the development of the person toward a moreperfect way of life.

Flourishing is something different thanhappiness.

Success does not necessarily make onehappy, nor does it necessarily lead toflourishing. There may be a certainprice to success that inhibits flourishingor diminishes happiness.

There has to be a delicate balance inany worthy practice; striving forsuccess rather than excellence maycorrupt the practice.

Prosperity creates comfort, security andsometimes recognition; but, again, theremay be a certain price to prosperity thatinhibits flourishing or diminisheshappiness.

If one aims at prosperity and success, then onelooks to the extrinsic rewards of the practice,rather than any intrinsic rewards the practiceor mastery of the practice might have.

The Good Life

the life of fame and power.

There are various senses of the good life promoted by our culture:

the life of enjoyment.

the Americandream..

the life of wealth.

aims to make life an adventure to enjoy, and to maximize all those pleasures which life affords.

The Good Life

the life of enjoyment.

Some difficulties with the life of enjoyment:

1. Pleasure has thresholds which require either larger quantities or higher qualitiesof it in order to reach the same level of satisfaction.

2. It requires a large amount of wealth to pursue, and occupations that can afford such a lifestyle.

4. Pursuit of pleasure does not exempt one from ordinary problems.

3. Full-blown pursuit of pleasure is usually self-destructive.

The American Dream. This is a life in pursuit of a modicum of social-economic goods, including secure and safe employment, a nice home, a good marriage and family life.

The Good Life

the Americandream..

•Often duties required to secure such a life require that one engage in risks and insecurities.

•Such a life can lead to an isolation fromcommunity, and a rabid form of consumerism.

•To insure security one may have to sacrificerelations; to insure relations one may have tosacrifice security and success.

Problems with the American dream:

•Life is not often secure; even in the more secure environments, danger and tragedy are constant threats.

This involves occupations and lifestyles that are conducive to maximizing one’s wealth.

The Good Life

the life of wealth.

•Wealth can solve only certain sorts ofWealth can solve only certain sorts ofproblems, and may exacerbate others.problems, and may exacerbate others.

• wealth is inherently instrumental, unless one wealth is inherently instrumental, unless one is a miser, it is used for the sake of something else.is a miser, it is used for the sake of something else.

• the pursuit of wealth in and of itself the pursuit of wealth in and of itself does not differentiate between acquiringdoes not differentiate between acquiring it virtuously or viciously.it virtuously or viciously.

Criticisms of the life of wealth

This involves the pursuit of recognitionand status within one’s community.

The Good Life

the life of fame and power.

• Fame and honor depends on the recognition byothers, which is often insecure and fickle.

Criticisms of the Life of Fame and Power

• Morally unconstrained pursuit of power or fame is notoriously corruptive, and can be inherently vicious.

Aristotle: the good life is a flourishing life, anda flourishing life is a virtuous one.

The virtuous life is a flourishing life.

Flourishing is not a state of mind, but a way of life. Flourishing should

be understood as the perfection of person.

Virtue is the perfection of one’s character, and prudence is the perfection of virtue.

Aristotle

A life is most complete and perfect, and persons can be genuinely counted as flourishing, when they can enjoy all the various sense of the good life as a person with a virtuous character.

according to Aristotle

A virtuous person will enjoy the right sort of pleasures which life can afford at the right amount and in the right way.

Those with virtuous character can be trusted with power to be fair-minded.

a person with virtuous character makes a good spouse, parent and friend.

A virtuous person is a safe companion and neighbor.

Wealth would be pursued without greed or ruthlessness.

for Aristotle

DELIBERATION is the second aspect of wisdom. Vision is concerned with determining the ends of action, and the best sense of the good life, butdeliberation is concerned with the best moral means to achieve that end.

DELIBERATION is just notlogical reasoning, but involvesthe whole person.

DELIBERATION is just not rational calculationbut also the consideration of which plan willlead to the best moral outcome.

Calculation is simply determining the most efficient means to an end without real regard for its moral quality.

Deliberation is also not cunning.Cunning is a kind of calculationthat always aims to maintainone’s advantage, no matter whatis needed to be done.

For Cicero deliberation is notjust calculation or cunning, butconcerned with moral means togood ends.

The Roman philosopher, Cicero, outlined an interesting model ofdeliberation.

For Cicero, deliberation is a matterof determining the proper relationsamong efficiency, advantage, andthe honorable.

Efficiency is concerned with determiningwhat is necessary for an action, and whatare the most economical means ofattaining an end, in the broad sense ofthe term.

Advantage is that which secures our security, and helps to maintain our position of power, or to gain more of what we already possess.

The Honorable is that which is virtuous, good and decent.

For Cicero, the honorable shouldalways outweigh the advantageous.

The exception to this arecases where advantagemust be taken in order to secure the honorableat a later date.

Only within the context of what ishonorable can we choose what isto our advantage.

Among those advantages, we shouldchoose only those that can be efficientlyaccomplished.

Besides these general considerationsfor deliberation,Cicero also lays outlinesthree parameters in which all deliberationtakes place.

Deliberation involves MEMORY, DISCERNMENT and FORESIGHT, which correspond with the three temporal dimensions of deliberation, past, present and future.

DELIBERATION involves

MEMORY

DISCERNMENT

FORESIGHT

Memory is the use of past experiences,collected wisdom, cultural training, andeducation, and the understanding one’sown life story, as a basis for makingmoral decisions.

Discernment is the perception ofthe subtleties, nuances, and particular circumstances of thepresent situation, the situationfor which you must make a choice.

Foresight is the ability to imaginethe future consequences and outcomesof a proposed decision.

MEMORY

Memory is the first aspectof deliberation, accordingto Cicero’s model.

It is concerned with drawing onthe past, in all its aspects, inorder to make the best moraljudgment concerning thepresent situation.

MEMORY

STORED WISDOM

EXPERIENCE

LIFE STORYLIFE STORYTRADITIONTRADITION

Some general characteristics of memory:

Memory is the means by which we access experience relevant to moral deliberation; remember that experience is crucial to prudence.

Experience in this regard is often Experience in this regard is often narratively re-constructed by memory. narratively re-constructed by memory.

Since moral vision is alsoSince moral vision is alsonarratively organized, a blending narratively organized, a blending of individual experience and moral of individual experience and moral vision is possible.vision is possible.

Past moral decisions and dilemmas Past moral decisions and dilemmas are often organized in story form.are often organized in story form.

Stories present paradigms for how to or how not to behave, and allows us to compare those paradigms with present,comparable situations.

Memory also provides an understanding of your life to date, and prepares the ground forhow the present situation is goingto affect or fit into that life history.

•Memory provides us with a certain Memory provides us with a certain sense of ourselves as a moral actor;sense of ourselves as a moral actor;

•it allows us to see how one decision it allows us to see how one decision rather than another will affect the rather than another will affect the continuity of ourselves as having a continuity of ourselves as having a certain moral quality of life. A certain moral quality of life. A decision may therefore negatively decision may therefore negatively or positively affect this continuity.or positively affect this continuity.

DISCERNMENT

DISCERNMENT

discernment is the perception of thenuances, parameters and peculiarities of a situation; it is a kind of discrimination that is concerned with apprehending distinctions and relations amongconcrete particulars.

Discernment is concerned with the comparison of the particulars in a concrete case with any generalities involved in a deliberated plan.

If memory supplies us with the insight and wisdom of the past, then discernment helps us to recognize that certain situations are or are not cases to whichthese can be appropriately applied.

discernment is also concerned with the discovery of something novel in a situation.

discernment is also concerned with thevaluative and affective assessment of a situation;discernment determines what is salient to a situation for the purposes of deliberation.

In general, discernment allows what is deliberated to be addressed to thissituation; discernment allows us to apply wisdom to the shape of the situation.

Whereas memory is concerned with the generalinformation we gain from our experience and ourmoral vision, discernment is concerned with thepresent, particular situation.

The relation of memory to discernment, then, is aconnection of the general to the particular case.

Casuistry is an illustration of such a process.

Casuistry was a technique of moral reasoningdeveloped by 16th century theologians.

Casuistry is concerned with the case; a case is aconfluence of persons and actions in a time and a place.

A case is concrete as distinguished from the abstract, because it represents the confluence of many circumstances.

Each case is unique in its circumstances, yet each case is similar in type to other cases; for that reason it can be compared and contrasted to others.

Casuistic reasoning

1. Using memory, one first determines the “place” of the case, that is, its type. What is the moral issue that might be involved: e.g., love vs. duty, loyalty vs. honor, immediate pleasures vs. long-term rewards.

one then recalls the various arguments of the moral type.

2. Using discernment, one determines the particulars of the case --the who, what, why and when of the case.

who are the particular persons in this case,their life-story, character, etc.

one then qualifies the arguments in (1) so they address the particular circumstances of the case.

Casuistic reasoning

Casuistic reasoning

3. The final step in the process is the comparison of cases.

one looks for precedents that resemble the current case which have been resolved satisfactorily.These then serve as paradigms by which to measure the various resolutions to this particular case.

FORESIGHT

FORESIGHT is one of threeaspects of deliberation accordingto Cicero’s model.

These include memory, which concernsthat which we can draw on from ourpast experiences, and the wisdom ofothers and, discernment, which concernsthe perception of the nuances andcomplexities of the present situation.

FORESIGHT

FORESIGHT is like being an authorof a book.

Given one’s situation, the charactersinvolved and proposed plans, whatare the likely consequences; how willpeople react; what are the probableoutcomes.

just as an author tries to follow out the con-sequences of certain decisions and actions hisor her characters make, so in foresight youattempt to follow the train of consequences ofcertain actions, given an understanding of thecharacters involved, and a decent understanding of how the world works.

JUDGMENT

Judgment is the last aspect of prudence; itconcerns the executionof a plan or a goal. Ittypically follows upondeliberation.

JUDGEMENT

Once plans and alternativeshave been deliberated, thena decision must be made aboutwhich will yield the best moraloutcome.

Judgments usually occurswhen there is some indecision about the variousdeliberations.

If it is clear what to do, thereis no need for judgment.

Indecisions or quandaries canbe classified into three basictypes:

Three Types of Judgement

Moral TemptationsRight vs. Wrong

Moral DilemmasRight vs. Right

Tragic ChoicesWrong vs WrongLesser of Two Evils

In moral temptations, onemust choose between whatyou believe is right and whatyou believe is wrong.

In the abstract this is an easyjudgment—you should choose theright thing—but in practice oneoften engages in self-deceptionand rationalization in such a wayas to justify the wrong choice toyourself.

Tragic choices are the mostdifficult decisions of all.

This requires a choice betweentwo or more alternatives, allof which are morally unpalatable.

If possible, then, you must choose between “the lesser of two evils.”

Moral dilemmas are alsodifficult judgments to make,since they require you to choose between two thingsyou could consider the rightthing to do.

Common types of Moral dilemmas

Individual vs. Community

Truth vs. Loyalty

Short-term vs. Long-term

Justice vs. Mercy

Individual vs. Community

In this sort of dilemma, onemust choose between thegood of a single individual,or the good of the group orcommunity.

Such decisions may require thesacrifice of the individual’s good,for the good of the whole.

Truth vs. Loyalty

In this sort of dilemma, oneis often called upon to choosebetween remaining loyal toa friend, for example, orbeing honest to others aboutthat friend.

Short-term vs. Long-term

In this dilemma, one mustchoose between short-termgoals and long-term ones,both of which may be valuableto you.

Justice vs. Mercy

In this sort of dilemma, onemust choose between actingfairly and consistently or, onthe other hand, to take intoconsideration the specialcircumstances of the case thatwould require leniency ormercy.

3. someone chooses to do something despite the factthat foresight has shown it to have undesirable con-sequences.

1. someone chooses to do something without anydeliberation; one acts on impulse even though there is adequate time for deliberation.

Bad judgement occurs when:

2. someone chooses to do something before alternativeplans have been fully deliberated