Keywords
Prudence
Political Leadership
Virtue
How to Cite
Abstract
Despite the rich tradition of thought proclaiming the need for virtuous leaders, and the continued, widespread call for character in those who hold political office, both scholars and citizens remain puzzled concerning the precise relation of character to political leadership. Drawing on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, this article argues that prudence is the most important virtue for political leaders and that keystone for understanding all leading character. More specifically, Aristotle’s account of prudence in the Nicomachean Ethics enumerates the three “stages” of prudential action—deliberation, comprehension, and decision—that are the primary channels wherein the moral character of political leaders influences their conduct.
Similar Articles
- Daniel J. Mahoney, With Reason Attentive to Grace , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2022): Symposium on Political Theology
- Sarah Gustafson, Opening the American Heart , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 47 No. 2 (2023): The Future Before Us: Early Career Women in Political Theory and Constitutional Studies
- Richard L Velkley, Being and Politics , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 34 (2005): Eric Voegelin’s <em>New Science of Politics</em>: A 50th Anniversary Symposium
- Phillip Pinell, Thinking and Political Considerations , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 48 No. 1 (2024): Essays
- John von Heyking, “Had Every Athenian Citizen Been a Socrates” , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2022): Symposium on Political Theology
- John Boersma, "Two Going Together” , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 45 No. 1 (2021): Symposium: Music in Plato's Political Thought
- Trevor Shelley, Tocquevillean Poetics , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 44 No. 2 (2020): Symposium: Leadership and the History of Political Thought
- Joshua Bowman, Introduction: Political Theory and Political Leadership , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 44 No. 2 (2020): Symposium: Leadership and the History of Political Thought
- Charles R Pinches, Why Church Matters , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2022): Symposium on Political Theology
- Timothy Fuller, Pfeffer Merrill, Avramenko, and Planinc on Eric Voegelin’s Use of Classical Political Science , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 41 No. 1 (2017): Symposium: Eric Voegelin and the Ancients
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Kenneth L Deutsch, Interwar German-Speaking Emigrés and American Political Thought , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 29 (2000): A Symposium on Herbert J Storing
- Quentin P Taylor, Publius and Persuasion , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 31 (2002): A Symposium on Gerhart Niemeyer
- Victor Bruno, Philosophy, Mysticism, and World Empires , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 43 No. 1 (2019): Essays
- Paul Peterson, The Rhetorical Design and Theoretical Teaching of Federalist No. 10 , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 17 (1987): Symposium: The Constitutional Convention of 1787
- Richard Avramenko, The Gnostic and the Spoudaios , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 41 No. 1 (2017): Symposium: Eric Voegelin and the Ancients
- Nathan Pinkoski, Why Alasdair MacIntyre is not a Conservative Post-Liberal , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 43 No. 2 (2019): Symposium: The Missouri Compromise at 200
- Matthew Van Hook, Myth, Moderate, or Machiavellian? , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 44 No. 2 (2020): Symposium: Leadership and the History of Political Thought
- George Thomas, Liberal Tolerance and Mere Civility , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 2 (2018): Symposium: The Political Thought of Robert Nisbet
- Eduardo Schmidt Passos, Carl Schmitt’s Political Theory during the Third Reich , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 1 (2018): Symposium: Philosophy in Weimar Germany
- Grant Havers, Leo Strauss on Nazism , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 1 (2018): Symposium: Philosophy in Weimar Germany