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
- V Bradley Lewis, Gerhart Niemeyer , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 31 (2002): A Symposium on Gerhart Niemeyer
- Giunia Gatta, Between Politics and Suprapolitics , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 1 (2018): Symposium: Philosophy in Weimar Germany
- Zachariah Black, Jesting with Giants , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 44 No. 1 (2020): Symposium: Wit in the History of Political Thought
- Lorraine Pangle, Plato's Political Epistemology , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 48 No. 1 (2024): Essays
- Joseph M Knippenberg, Liberalism and Religion , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 30 (2001): Symposia on Kant Studies and on <em>I’ll Take My Stand</em>
- Victor Bruno, Philosophy, Mysticism, and World Empires , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 43 No. 1 (2019): Essays
- 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
- Gordon Lloyd, Steven P Ealy, The Eric Voegelin-Willmoore Kendall Correspondence , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 33 (2004): Essays
- Aaron Kushner, Stephen Clouse, Citizenship and the Good Life , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 48 No. 1 (2024): Essays
- Nadia Urbinati, About Democracy’s Friends , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 1 (2018): Symposium: Philosophy in Weimar Germany
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