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
- Thomas W. Holman, Eric Voegelin and Martin Heidegger on the Anaximander Fragment , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 48 No. 1 (2024): Essays
- Alexander Orwin, City, Poetry, and Song , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 47 No. 1 (2023): Political Theory and Economics, and other Essays
- Sandrine Baume, Emancipation from the Legal Order , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2022): Symposium on Political Theology
- Arlene Saxonhouse, Women In and Out of the Canon , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 47 No. 2 (2023): The Future Before Us: Early Career Women in Political Theory and Constitutional Studies
- Nadia Urbinati, About Democracy’s Friends , 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
- Daniel I. O’Neill, Reply to Critics , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 42 No. 1 (2018): Symposium: Philosophy in Weimar Germany
- Sara Henary, The “Best Fence” against Nature’s Ambiguity , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 2 (2022): Jefferson, Paine, Tolstoy, Frankenstein, and more!
- J. David Franks, Apocalypse of Reality , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2022): Symposium on Political Theology
- Walter Nicgorski, Politics, Political Philosophy, and Christian Faith , The Political Science Reviewer: Vol. 31 (2002): A Symposium on Gerhart Niemeyer
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