PHILOSOPHY

WEEK 1 – 2
Doing Philosophy
The Definition of Philosophy

The Free Dictionary has defined Philosophy as: “study of the ultimate reality, causes, and principles underlying
being and thinking.”

Philosophy Basics has collected the following definitions of philosophy from various sources:

At its simplest, philosophy (from the Greek or phílosophía, meaning ‘the love of wisdom’) is the study of
knowledge, or "thinking about thinking", although the breadth of what it covers is perhaps best illustrated by a
selection of other alternative definitions:

 the discipline concerned with questions of how one should live (ethics); what sorts of things exist and what
are their essential natures (metaphysics); what counts as genuine knowledge (epistemology); and what are
the correct principles of reasoning (logic) (Wikipedia)
 investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning
rather than empirical methods (American Heritage Dictionary)
 the study of the ultimate nature of existence, reality, knowledge and goodness, as discoverable by human
reasoning (Penguin English Dictionary)
 the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics (WordNet)
 the search for knowledge and truth, especially about the nature of man and his behaviour and beliefs
(Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary)
 the rational and critical inquiry into basic principles (Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia)
 the study of the most general and abstract features of the world and categories with which we think: mind,
matter, reason, proof, truth, etc. (Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy)
 careful thought about the fundamental nature of the world, the grounds for human knowledge, and the
evaluation of human conduct (The Philosophy Pages)

As used originally by the ancient Greeks, the term "philosophy" meant the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake,
and comprised ALL areas of speculative thought, including the arts, sciences and religion.

Holism

Philosophy Basics’ article on holism stated the following:

“Holism in general terms (whether in science, sociology, economics, linguistics or philosophy) is the idea that all the
properties of a given system cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone, but the system as a
whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.

In philosophy, the principle of Holism (which comes from the Greek "holos" meaning "all" or "total") was concisely
summarized by Aristotle in his "Metaphysics": "The whole is more than the sum of its parts". However, the term
"holism" was only introduced into the language by the South African statesman Jan Smuts as recently as 1926.

Holism has significance for Epistemology and the Philosophy of Language in particular. It is contrasted to
Epistemological Reductionism (the position that a complex system can be explained by reduction to its fundamental
parts) or of Atomism (insofar as it relates to Philosophy of Language, this is the position that sentences have
meaning or content completely independently of their relations to other sentences or beliefs).”

Types of Holism

 Epistemological Holism (or Confirmation Holism) is the claim that a single scientific theory cannot be tested
in isolation, because a test of one theory always depends on other theories and hypotheses. One aspect of
 this is that the interpretation of observation is "theory-laden" (dependent on theory); another aspect is that
evidence alone is insufficient to determine which theory is correct.
 Semantic Holism is a doctrine in the Philosophy of Language to the effect that a certain part of language (e.g.
a term or a complete sentence) can only be understood through its relations to a (previously understood)
larger segment of language, possibly the entire language. In 1884, Gottlob Frege formulated his influential
Context Principle, according to which it is only within the context of a proposition or sentence that a word
acquires its meaning.

In the 1950's and 1960's, philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein, W.V.O. Quine and Donald Davidson
broadened this principle still further to arrive at the position that a sentence (and therefore a word) has
meaning only in the context of a whole language.

Confirmation Holism and Semantic Holism are inextricably linked, and yet, although Confirmation Holism is
widely accepted among philosophers, Semantic Holism is much less so.

 Moderate Holism (or Semantic Molecularism) is a compromise position, which holds that the meanings of
words depend on some subset of the language (not the entire language). The argument then arises as to
which parts of a language are "constitutive" of the meaning of an expression.

Reflective Practice

Reflective activity is simply defined as “the ability to think about or reflect on what you do.” Its aim is to engage in
a process of continuous learning. Gillie said that it involves “paying critical attention to the practical values and
theories which inform everyday actions, by examining practice reflectively and reflexively. This leads to
developmental insight.”

In the 20th century, John Dewey wrote about reflective practice, exploring experience, interaction and reflection.
After that, Kurt Lewin and Jean Piaget developed theories relevant to human learning and development. Later on,
Donald Schön’s book, The Reflective Practitioner, published in 1983 introduced the concepts of reflection-on-action
and reflection-in-action.

David Boud, an adult education professor explained that reflection is an essential human activity in which people
recapture their experience, explore it and evaluate it.

Models of reflective practice

 Borton (1970)

Terry Borton's 1970 book Reach, Touch, and Teach popularized a simple learning cycle inspired by Gestalt
therapy composed of three questions which ask the practitioner: What, So what, and Now what? Through
this analysis, a description of a situation is given which then leads into the scrutiny of the situation and the
construction of knowledge that has been learnt through the experience. Subsequently, practitioners reflect
on ways in which they can personally improve and the consequences of their response to the experience.
Borton's model was later adapted by practitioners outside the field of education, such as the field of nursing
and the helping professions. (Borton, 1970; Rolfe, et.al., 2001)

 Kolb and Fry (1975)

Learning theorist David A. Kolb was highly influenced by the earlier research conducted by John Dewey and
Jean Piaget. Kolb's reflective model highlights the concept of experiential learning and is centered on the
transformation of information into knowledge. This takes place after a situation has occurred, and entails a
practitioner reflecting on the experience, gaining a general understanding of the concepts encountered
during the experience, and then testing these general understandings in a new situation. In this way, the
knowledge that is formed from a situation is continuously applied and reapplied, building on a practitioner's
prior experiences and knowledge. (Kolb and Fry, 1975)

 Argyris and Schön 1978

 Management researchers Chris Argyris and Donald Schön pioneered the idea of single-loop learning and
double-loop learning in 1978. Their theory was built around the recognition and correction of a perceived
fault or error. Single-loop learning is when a practitioner or organization, even after an error has occurred
and a correction is made, continues to rely on current strategies, techniques or policies when a situation
again comes to light. Double-loop learning involves the modification of objectives, strategies or policies so
that when a similar situation arises a new framing system is employed. (Smith, 2013; Argyris, et.al., 2001)

Schon advocated 2 types of reflective practice. Firstly, reflection-on-action, which involves reflecting on an
experience that you have already had, or an action that you have already taken, and considering what could
have been done differently, as well as looking at the positives from that interaction. The other type of
reflection Schon notes is reflection-in-action, or reflecting on your actions as you are doing them, and
considering issues like best practice throughout the process.

 Gibbs 1988

Learning researcher Graham Gibbs discussed the use of structured debriefing to facilitate the reflection
involved in Kolb's experiential learning cycle. Gibbs presents the stages of a full structured debriefing as
follows (1988):

 (Initial experience)
 Description
"What happened? Don't make judgments yet or try to draw conclusions; simply describe.
 Feelings
"What were your reactions and feelings? Again don't move on to analyzing these yet."
 Evaluation
"What was good or bad about the experience? Make value judgments."
 Analysis
"What sense can you make of the situation? Bring in ideas from outside the experience to help you."
"What was really going on?"
"Were different people's experiences similar or different in important ways?"
 Conclusions (general)
"What can be concluded, in a general sense, from these experiences and the analyses you have
undertaken?"
 Conclusions (specific)
"What can be concluded about your own specific, unique, personal situation or way of working?"
 Personal action plans
"What are you going to do differently in this type of situation next time?"
"What steps are you going to take on the basis of what you have learnt?"

Gibbs' suggestions are often cited as "Gibbs' reflective cycle" or "Gibbs' model of reflection", and simplified into the
following six distinct stages to assist in structuring reflection on learning experiences (Finlay, 2008):

 Description
 Feelings
 Evaluation
 Analysis
 Conclusions
 Action plan
 Johns 1995

Professor of nursing Christopher Johns designed a structured mode of reflection that provides a practitioner with a
guide to gain greater understanding of his or her practice. (Johns, 2013) It is designed to be carried out through the
act of sharing with a colleague or mentor, which enables the experience to become learnt knowledge at a faster rate
than reflection alone. (Johns, 2010)
Johns highlights the importance of experienced knowledge and the ability of a practitioner to access, understand and
put into practice information that has been acquired through empirical means. Reflection occurs though "looking in"
on one's thoughts and emotions and "looking out" at the situation experienced. Johns draws on the work of Barbara
Carper to expand on the notion of "looking out" at a situation. (Carper, 1978)

Five patterns of knowing are incorporated into the guided reflection: the aesthetic, personal, ethical, empirical and
reflexive aspects of the situation. Johns' model is comprehensive and allows for reflection that touches on many
important elements. (Johns, 1995)

 Brookfield 1998

Adult education scholar Stephen Brookfield proposed that critically reflective practitioners constantly research their
assumptions by seeing practice through four complementary lenses.

 Lens 1: Our autobiography as a learner. Our autobiography is an important source of insight into practice. As
we talk to each other about critical events in our practice, we start to realize that individual crises are usually
collectively experienced dilemmas. Analysing our autobiographies allows us to draw insight and meanings
for practice on a deep visceral emotional level.
 Lens 2: Our learners' eyes. Seeing ourselves through learners' eyes, we may discover that learners are
interpreting our actions in the way that we mean them. But often we are surprised by the diversity of
meanings people read into our words and actions. A cardinal principle of seeing ourselves through learners'
eyes is that of ensuring the anonymity of their critical opinions. We have to make learners feel safe. Seeing
our practice through learners' eyes helps us teach more responsively.
 Lens 3: Our colleagues' experiences. Our colleagues serve as critical mirrors reflecting back to us images of
our actions. Talking to colleagues about problems and gaining their perspective increases our chance of
finding some information that can help our situation.
 Lens 4: Theoretical literature. Theory can help us "name" our practice by illuminating the general elements of
what we think are idiosyncratic experiences.

WEEK 3
Opinion vs Truth: Wisdom and Truth Through Philosophy
Wisdom

The word wisdom or sapience is the ability to think and act using knowledge, experience, understanding, common
sense and insight. Wisdom has many definitions attached to it, including several subtypes. Two key subtypes of
wisdom that are worth noting are phronesis and sophia.

Phronesis refers to practical knowledge, or the seeking of knowledge to apply to the given circumstance such as an
understanding of people, objects, events, situations, and the willingness as well as the ability to apply perception,
judgment, and action in keeping with the understanding of what is the optimal course of action. Sophia on the
other hand refers to “transcendent wisdom” or the “ultimate nature of reality.”

The Oxford English Dictionary defines wisdom as "Capacity of judging rightly in matters relating to life and
conduct; soundness of judgment in the choice of means and ends; sometimes, less strictly, sound sense, esp. in
practical affairs: opp. to folly;" also "Knowledge (esp. of a high or abstruse kind); enlightenment, learning,
erudition.”

Charles Haddon Spurgeon defined wisdom as "the right use of knowledge."

Robert I. Sutton and Andrew Hargadon defined the "attitude of wisdom" as "acting with knowledge while
doubting what one knows". In the psychological literature however the construct of wisdom does not have a
commonly accepted definition.
  The ancient Greeks considered wisdom to be an important virtue, personified as the goddesses Metis and
Athena. Athena is said to have sprung from the head of Zeus. She was portrayed as strong, fair, merciful, and
chaste.
 To Socrates and Plato, philosophy was literally the love of Wisdom (philo-sophia). This permeates Plato's
dialogues, especially The Republic, in which the leaders of his proposed utopia are to be philosopher kings,
rulers who understand the Form of the Good and possess the courage to act accordingly.
 Aristotle, in his Metaphysics, defined wisdom as the understanding of causes, i.e. knowing why things are a
certain way, which is deeper than merely knowing that things are a certain way. In fact, it was Aristotle who
first made a distinction between phronesis and sophia aspects of wisdom.
 The ancient Romans also valued wisdom. It was personified in Minerva, or Pallas. She also represents skillful
knowledge and the virtues, especially chastity. Her symbol was the owl which is still a popular
representation of wisdom, because it can see in darkness. She was said to be born from Jupiter's forehead.
 Wisdom is also important within Christianity. Jesus emphasized it. Paul the Apostle, in his first epistle to the
Corinthians, argued that there is both secular and divine wisdom, urging Christians to pursue the latter.
Prudence, which is intimately related to wisdom, became one of the four cardinal virtues of Catholicism.
 The Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas considered wisdom to be the "father" (i.e. the cause, measure,
and form) of all virtues.
 In Buddhist traditions, developing wisdom plays a central role where comprehensive guidance on how to
develop wisdom is provided.
 In the Inuit tradition, developing wisdom was one of the aims of teaching. An Inuit Elder said that a person
became wise when they could see what needed to be done and do it successfully without being told what to
do. In many cultures, the name for third molars, which are the last teeth to grow, is etymologically linked
with wisdom, e.g., as in the English wisdom tooth.

Religious perspectives

 Ancient Egypt

Sia represents the personification or god of wisdom in the traditional mythology adhered to in Ancient
Egypt.

 Buddhism

Developing wisdom is of central importance in Buddhist traditions, where the ultimate aim is often
presented as “seeing things as they are” or as gaining a “penetrative understanding of all phenomena,”
which in turn is described as ultimately leading to the “complete freedom from suffering.”

In Buddhism, developing wisdom is accomplished through an understanding of what are known as the Four
Noble Truths and by following the Noble Eightfold Path. This path lists mindfulness as one of eight required
components for cultivating wisdom.

Wisdom is the antidote to the self chosen poison of ignorance. The Buddha has much to say on the subject
of wisdom including:

 He who arbitrates a case by force does not thereby become just (established in Dhamma). But the
wise man is he who carefully discriminates between right and wrong.
 He who leads others by nonviolence, righteously and equitably, is indeed a guardian of justice, wise
and righteous.
 One is not wise merely because he talks much. But he who is calm, free from hatred and fear, is
verily called a wise man.
 By quietude alone one does not become a sage (muni) if he is foolish and ignorant. But he who, as if
holding a pair of scales, takes the good and shuns the evil, is a wise man; he is indeed a muni by that
very reason. He who understands both good and evil as they really are, is called a true sage.

To recover the original supreme wisdom of self-nature covered by the self-imposed three dusty poisons
(greed, anger, ignorance) Buddha taught to his students the threefold training by turning greed into
 generosity and discipline, anger into kindness and meditation, ignorance into wisdom. As the Sixth
Patriarch of Chán Buddhism, Huineng, said in his Platform Sutra, "Mind without dispute is self-nature
discipline, mind without disturbance is self-nature meditation, mind without ignorance is self-nature
wisdom."

 Christianity

In Christian theology, "wisdom" describes an aspect of God, or the theological concept regarding the wisdom
of God.

A part from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and James, other main books of wisdom in the Bible are Job, Psalms, and
1 and 2 Corinthians, which give lessons on gaining and using wisdom through difficult situations. But wisdom
is not limited to only these books in the Bible, no matter the book, words of wisdom can be found. Through
devotional time or meditation through the reading and reflection of the Bible and other readings that
analyze the Bible, one can gain wisdom in order to help Christians become more aware, insightful and happy
in life.

 Confucianism

According to Confucius (551–479 BCE), one can learn wisdom by three methods:

 reflection (the noblest)

 imitation (the easiest)
 experience (the bitterest)

One does not dispense wisdom oneself unless asked by another. This means that a wise man never tells his
wisdom unless asked person to person.

According to the Doctrine of the Mean, Confucius also said:

"Love of learning is akin to wisdom. To practice with vigor is akin to humanity. To know to be shameful is
akin to courage (zhi, ren, yong.. three of Mengzi's sprouts of virtue).”

Compare this with the Confucian classic, Great Learning, which begins with: "The Way of learning to be great
consists in manifesting the clear character, loving the people, and abiding in the highest good." One can
clearly see the correlation with the Roman virtue prudence, especially if one interprets "clear character" as
"clear conscience."

 Hinduism

Wisdom in Hinduism is considered a state of mind and soul where a person achieves liberation.

The god of wisdom is Ganesha and the goddess of knowledge is Saraswati.

"O Lord Lead me from the unreal to the real.

Lead me from darkness to light.

Lead me from death to immortality.

May there be peace, peace, and perfect peace".

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.3.28.

Wisdom in Hinduism is knowing oneself as the truth, basis for the entire Creation, i.e., of Shristi. In other
words, wisdom simply means a person with Self-awareness as the one who witnesses the entire creation in
all its facets and forms. Further it means realization that an individual through right conduct and right living
over an unspecified period comes to realize their true relationship with the creation and the Paramatma
who rules it.

 Islam
 In Islam, Wisdom is deemed as one of the greatest gifts humankind can enjoy.

The Quran states:

"He gives wisdom to whom He wills, and whoever has been given wisdom has certainly been given much
good. And none will remember except those of understanding."

— Qur'an, sura 2 (Al-Baqara), ayat 269

 Judaism

The word wisdom is mentioned 222 times in the Hebrew Bible. It was regarded as one of the highest virtues
among the Israelites along with kindness and justice. Both the books of Proverbs and Psalms urge readers to
obtain and to increase in wisdom.

In the Hebrew Bible, wisdom is represented by Solomon, who asks God for wisdom in 2 Chronicles 1:10.
Much of the Book of Proverbs, a book of wise sayings, is attributed to Solomon. In Proverbs 9:10, the fear of
YHWH is called the beginning of wisdom. In Proverbs 1:20, there is also reference to wisdom personified in
female form, "Wisdom calls aloud in the streets, she raises her voice in the marketplaces." In Proverbs 8:22–
31, this personified wisdom is described as being present with God before creation began and even taking
part in creation itself.

The Talmud teaches that a wise person is a person who can foresee the future. Nolad is the Hebrew word for
"future," but also the Hebrew word for birth, so one rabbinic interpretation of the teaching is that a wise
person is one who can foresee the consequences of his/her choices (i.e. can "see the future" that he/she
"gives birth" to).

 Taoism

In Taoism, wisdom is construed as adherence to the Three Treasures (Taoism): charity, simplicity, and
humility.

Knowing others is intelligence;

knowing yourself is true wisdom.

Mastering others is strength;

mastering yourself is true power.

Tao Te Ching, 33, tr. S. Mitchell

Truth

It is difficult to define truth as it may differ in any case. Blackburn defined truth as “the aim of belief wherein falsity
is a fault.” In the same article on truth, it says that truth is essential and believing in something that is not the truth
may lead to consequences.

Propositions. A common technical definition of a proposition (credited to Peter van Inwagen) is "a non-linguistic
bearer of truth value." A proposition is a representation of the world or a way the world could possibly be and
propositions are either true or false. Propositions are different than sentences. Sentences are symbolic, linguistic
representations of propositions.

Belief. Beliefs are things (at least) people have. They don't exist outside the mind. Some philosophers say beliefs are
"dispositional." That is, they incline a person to behave in a way as if the thing they believe is true. So a belief,
simply, is a proposition that a person accepts as representing the way the world actually is. Beliefs can be about false
propositions and thus be "wrong" because the person accepts them as true. This is a critical distinction. While a
proposition has to be true or false, beliefs can be about true or false propositions even though a person always
accepts them as being true.
Knowledge. Knowledge is belief in a true proposition that a person is justified in holding as true. The conditions
under which a person is justified is complicated and there are many theories about when the conditions are met.
Theories of knowledge attempt to describe when a person is in a "right" cognitive relationship with true
propositions.

WEEK 5
Transcendence and the Human Body
Transcendence

In philosophy, the adjective transcendental and the noun transcendence convey three different but related
meanings, all of them derived from the word's literal meaning (from Latin) of climbing or going beyond, that
correspond with Ancient philosophy, Medieval philosophy, and modern philosophy.

Transcendence often refers to an experience with the divine or God, which is conceived as absolute, eternal, and
infinite. Negative theology and mysticism recognizes the limits of conceptual understanding or linguistic articulation
of that which transcends the phenomenal world. Negative theology in particular is an example of an attempt to
describe what is transcendent by negating what is finite and relative.

Immanuel Kant characterized his critical philosophy as "transcendental" as an attempt to explain the possibility of
experience. While Kant's use of the term is unique to him, Edmund Husserl also adopted the Kantian notion in his
phenomenology.

Transcendence generally refers to the divine, or God, who is conceived as being transcendent, infinite, absolute, and
eternal. These concepts are difficult to conceptualize and further difficult to define. They are, therefore, often
defined in terms of the negation of finite concepts. For example, infinite is defined as "not finite," eternity is "not
temporal" or "no beginning and no end." Negative theology likewise tries not to describe God in direct or immediate
terms, but tries to describe Him as a negation of what human beings can directly conceptualize.

Mysticism can also be seen as an attempt to access the divine, or that which is transcendent.

 Transcendence and Immanence

One use of the term transcendence, as part of the concept pair transcendence/immanence, is the use of the
term in reference to God's relation to the world. Here transcendent means that God is completely outside of
and beyond the world, as opposed to the notion that God is manifested in the world. This meaning
originates in the Aristotelian view of God as the prime mover, a nonmaterial self-consciousness that is
outside of the world. On the other hand, philosophies of immanence such as stoicism and those held by
Spinoza and Deleuze maintain that God is manifested in the world.

Similarly, Plato's Ideas are also divine objects that transcend the world. For Plato, the Idea of beauty is
perfect and absolute, which manifests itself in imperfect form in the phenomenal world. Similarly, the Idea
of the Good is eternal, perfect, and absolute, and transcendent of the world. On the other hand, goodness in
the world is imperfect, temporal, and finite, and it is understood in reference to the Idea of good.

 Kant and modern Philosophy

In modern philosophy, Kant introduced a new use of the term transcendental. In his theory of knowledge,
this concept is concerned with the conditions of possibility of knowledge itself. He also set the term
transcendental in opposition to the term transcendent, the latter meaning "that, which goes beyond"
(transcends) any possible knowledge of a human being. For him transcendental meant knowledge about our
cognitive faculty with regard to how objects are possible a priori.

For Kant, the "transcendent," as opposed to the "transcendental," is that which lies beyond what our faculty
of knowledge can legitimately know. Hegel's counter-argument to Kant was that to know a boundary is also
 to be aware of what it bounds and as such what lies beyond it—in other words, to have already transcended
it.

 Husserlian phenomenology and Sartre

In Husserlian phenomenology, the "transcendent" is that which transcends our own consciousness—that
which is objective rather than only a phenomenon of consciousness. "Noema" (object of intentionality, that
is, object of mental acts such as thinking, feeling, imagining, hoping, believing, and others) is used in
phenomenology to refer to the terminus of an intention as given for consciousness.

Jean-Paul Sartre also speaks of transcendence in his works. In Being and Nothingness, Sartre uses the term
transcendence to describe the relation of the self to the object oriented world, as well as our concrete
relations with others. For Sartre, the for-itself is sometimes called a transcendence. Additionally, if the other
is viewed strictly as an object, much like any other object, then the other is, for the for itself, a
transcendence-transcended. When the for-itself grasps the other in the others world, and grasps the
subjectivity that the other has, it is referred to as transcending-transcendence. Thus, Sartre defines relations
with others in terms of transcendence.

Self-Transcendence

Self-transcendence is the concept of making personal progress in different fields – physical, mental spiritual. Self-
transcendence means we seek to exceed our previous achievements and extend our capacities.

One of the most famous American psychologists, Abraham Maslow, became widely known for his theory of
psychological health called as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. It is often illustrated as a pyramid with levels of our basic
needs: (from top to bottom) self-actualization, esteem, love/belonging, safety and physiological.

Unknown to most, Maslow amended this model towards the end of his life. He argued that there is another, higher
level of development, what he called self-transcendence. We achieve this level by focusing on goals beyond the self
like altruism, spiritual awakening, liberation from egocentricity, and ultimately the unity of being. Here is how he put
it:

Transcendence refers to the very highest and most inclusive or holistic levels of human consciousness,
behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in
general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos. (The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, New York,
1971, p. 269.)

This is not to be confused with self-actualization because the latter refers to fulfilling your own potential while the
former refers to literally transcending the self.

There are three kinds of self-transcendence. These are the following:

 Physical Self-Transcendence.

Self-Transcendence can most easily be measured through improvements in physical achievements. In

running, it involves trying to break new records in both time and speed. The beauty of self-transcendence is
that it can be practiced by anyone; we need not compete with others, we can just compete with ourselves.
From this perspective, we can get great joy by surpassing our previous personal bests.

 Spiritual self-transcendence.

Self-transcendence is a concept that is incorporated into different spiritual traditions. In this regard, we are
seeking to go beyond our limited state of ego to expand our own consciousness. When we identify only with
the body and ego, it is a limited perspective. Spiritual traditions suggest we are more than just a frail body.
Through practicing yoga and spiritual traditions, we learn to expand our consciousness and feel our
connection with the universal Self.

 Physical and Spiritual Self-Transcendence.

 There is no need to separate the physical self-transcendence with spiritual development; they can
harmoniously work together and complement each other. One notable example of this is the 3100-mile Self
Transcendence race founded by Sri Chinmoy. The 3100 mile is an epic race which can take competitors
between 45 – 60 days to complete. To run such a mind-boggling distance requires the co-operation of both
body and soul. By completing this act of physical transcendence, we are going beyond the limits of what the
mind may think possible. By stretching our physical capacities, we also delve into a different understanding
of ourselves.

WEEK 6
Order and Disorder in the Environment
Environmental Ethics

Environmental ethics is defined by Conserve Energy Future as a branch of ethics that studies the relation of human
beings and the environment and how ethics play a role in this.”

Nature.com, on the other hand, gave the following definition: “Environmental ethics is a branch of applied
philosophy that studies the conceptual foundations of environmental values as well as more concrete issues
surrounding societal attitudes, actions, and policies to protect and sustain biodiversity and ecological systems.”

According to Wikipedia, “Environmental ethics is the part of environmental philosophy which considers extending
the traditional boundaries of ethics from solely including humans to including the non-human world. It exerts
influence on a large range of disciplines including environmental law, environmental sociology, ecotheology,
ecological economics, ecology and environmental geography.”

There are many ethical decisions that human beings make with respect to the environment.

For example:

 Should humans continue to clear cut forests for the sake of human consumption?
 Why should humans continue to propagate its species, and life itself?
 Should humans continue to make gasoline-powered vehicles?
 What environmental obligations do humans need to keep for future generations?
 Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of a species for the convenience of humanity?
 How should humans best use and conserve the space environment to secure and expand life?

 Deep Ecology

“Deep ecology” was born in Scandinavia, the result of discussions between Næss and his colleagues Sigmund
Kvaløy and Nils Faarlund (see Næss 1973 and 1989; also see Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999 for a
historical survey and commentary on the development of deep ecology). All three shared a passion for the
great mountains.

The “shallow ecology movement”, as Næss (1973) calls it, is the “fight against pollution and resource
depletion”, the central objective of which is “the health and affluence of people in the developed countries.”
The “deep ecology movement”, in contrast, endorses “biospheric egalitarianism”, the view that all living
things are alike in having value in their own right, independent of their usefulness to others. The deep
ecologist respects this intrinsic value, taking care, for example, when walking on the mountainside not to
cause unnecessary damage to the plants.

 Feminism and the environment

Broadly speaking, a feminist issue is any that contributes in some way to understanding the oppression of
women. Feminist theories attempt to analyze women’s oppression, its causes and consequences, and
suggest strategies and directions for women’s liberation. By the mid 1970s, feminist writers had raised the
 issue of whether patriarchal modes of thinking encouraged not only widespread inferiorizing and colonizing
of women, but also of people of color, animals and nature. Sheila Collins (1974), for instance, argued that
male-dominated culture or patriarchy is supported by four interlocking pillars: sexism, racism, class
exploitation, and ecological destruction.

Emphasizing the importance of feminism to the environmental movement and various other liberation
movements, some writers, such as Ynestra King (1989a and 1989b), argue that the domination of women by
men is historically the original form of domination in human society, from which all other hierarchies—of
rank, class, and political power—flow.

 Disenchantment and the New Animism

According to the new animists, the replacement of traditional animism (the view that personalized souls are
found in animals, plants, and other material objects) by a form of disenchanting positivism directly leads to
an anthropocentric perspective, which is accountable for much human destructiveness towards nature. In a
disenchanted world, there is no meaningful order of things or events outside the human domain, and there
is no source of sacredness or dread of the sort felt by those who regard the natural world as peopled by
divinities or demons (Stone 2006).

 Traditional Ethical Theories

As an alternative to consequentialism and deontology both of which consider “thin” concepts such as
“goodness” and “rightness” as essential to morality, virtue ethics proposes to understand morality—and
assess the ethical quality of actions—in terms of “thick” concepts such as “kindness”, “honesty”, “sincerity”
and “justice”. As virtue ethics speaks quite a different language from the other two kinds of ethical theory,
its theoretical focus is not so much on what kinds of things are good/bad, or what makes an action
right/wrong. Indeed, the richness of the language of virtues, and the emphasis on moral character, is
sometimes cited as a reason for exploring a virtues-based approach to the complex and always-changing
questions of sustainability and environmental care (Hill 1983, Wensveen 2000, Sandler 2007).

Furthermore, unlike deontology or consequentialism the moral focus of which is other people or states of
the world, one central issue for virtue ethics is how to live a flourishing human life, this being a central
concern of the moral agent himself or herself. “Living virtuously” is Aristotle’s recipe for flourishing. Versions
of virtue ethics advocating virtues such as “benevolence”, “piety”, “filiality”, and “courage”, have also been
held by thinkers in the Chinese Confucian tradition. The connection between morality and psychology is
another core subject of investigation for virtue ethics.

 Obligations concerning the natural environment

A. Human Beings

B. Animals

C. Individual Living Organisms

D. Holistic Entities

 Marshall’s Categories

Alan Marshall and Michael Smith has categorized the various ways the natural environment is valued. These
are the following:

 Libertarian extension

Marshall’s Libertarian extension echoes a civil liberty approach (i.e. a commitment to extend equal
rights to all members of a community). In environmentalism, though, the community is generally
thought to consist of non-humans as well as humans.

Andrew Brennan was an advocate of ecologic humanism (eco-humanism), the argument that all
ontological entities, animate and in-animate, can be given ethical worth purely on the basis that they
 exist. The work of Arne Næss and his collaborator Sessions also falls under the libertarian extension,
although they preferred the term "deep ecology". Deep ecology is the argument for the intrinsic
value or inherent worth of the environment – the view that it is valuable in itself. Their argument,
incidentally, falls under both the libertarian extension and the ecologic extension.

Peter Singer's work can be categorized under Marshall's 'libertarian extension'. He reasoned that the
"expanding circle of moral worth" should be redrawn to include the rights of non-human animals,
and to not do so would be guilty of speciesism. Singer found it difficult to accept the argument from
intrinsic worth of a-biotic or "non-sentient" (non-conscious) entities, and concluded in his first
edition of "Practical Ethics" that they should not be included in the expanding circle of moral worth.
This approach is essentially then, bio-centric. However, in a later edition of "Practical Ethics" after
the work of Næss and Sessions, Singer admits that, although unconvinced by deep ecology, the
argument from intrinsic value of non-sentient entities is plausible, but at best problematic. Singer
advocated a humanist ethics.

 Ecologic extension

Alan Marshall's category of ecologic extension places emphasis not on human rights but on the
recognition of the fundamental interdependence of all biological (and some abiological) entities and
their essential diversity. Whereas Libertarian

Extension can be thought of as flowing from a political reflection of the natural world, ecologic
extension is best thought of as a scientific reflection of the natural world. Ecological Extension is
roughly the same classification of Smith's eco-holism, and it argues for the intrinsic value inherent in
collective ecological entities like ecosystems or the global environment as a whole entity. Holmes
Rolston, among others, has taken this approach.

This category might include James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis; the theory that the planet earth alters
its geo-physiological structure over time in order to ensure the continuation of an equilibrium of
evolving organic and inorganic matter. The planet is characterized as a unified, holistic entity with
ethical worth of which the human race is of no particular significance in the long run.

 Conservation ethics

Marshall's category of 'conservation ethics' is an extension of use-value into the non-human

biological world. It focuses only on the worth of the environment in terms of its utility or usefulness
to humans. It contrasts the intrinsic value ideas of 'deep ecology', hence is often referred to as
'shallow ecology', and generally argues for the preservation of the environment on the basis that it
has extrinsic value –instrumental to the welfare of human beings. Conservation is therefore a means
to an end and purely concerned with mankind and inter-generational considerations. It could be
argued that it is this ethic that formed the underlying arguments proposed by Governments at the
Kyoto summit in 1997 and three agreements reached in Rio in 1992.

Anthropocentrism

Anthropocentrism is the position that humans are the most important or critical element in any given situation; that
the human race must always be its own primary concern.

Peter Vardy distinguished between two types of anthropocentrism. A strong anthropocentric ethic argues that
humans are at the center of reality and it is right for them to be so. Weak anthropocentrism, however, argues that
reality can only be interpreted from a human point of view, thus humans have to be at the center of reality as they
see it.

Another point of view has been developed by Bryan Norton, who has become one of the essential actors of
environmental ethics by launching environmental pragmatism, now one of its leading trends. Environmental
pragmatism refuses to take a stance in disputes between defenders of anthropocentrist and non-anthropocentrist
ethics. Instead, Norton distinguishes between strong anthropocentrism and weak-or-extended-anthropocentrism
and argues that the former must underestimate the diversity of instrumental values humans may derive from the
natural world.

A recent view relates anthropocentrism to the future of life. Biotic ethics are based on the human identity as part of
gene/protein organic life whose effective purpose is self propagation. This implies a human purpose to secure and
propagate life. Humans are central because only they can secure life beyond the duration of the Sun, possibly for
trillions of eons. Biotic ethics values life itself, as embodied in biological structures and processes. Humans are
special because they can secure the future of life on cosmological scales. In particular, humans can continue sentient
life that enjoys its existence, adding further motivation to propagate life. Humans can secure the future of life, and
this future can give human existence a cosmic purpose.

WEEK 7
Prudence
Prudence

Prudence, as defined by the Merriam Webster Dictionary, is the ability to govern and discipline oneself by the use of
reason and it is one of the four Cardinal virtues. It is also called the mother of all the virtues. The word has been
derived from an Old French word prudence, which has also been derived from the Latin word, prudentia, meaning
“foresight, sagacity.” Prudence is most commonly associated with words such as wisdom, insight, and knowledge.

Prudence, by itself, cannot perform actions and is concerned solely with knowledge. However, all virtues must be
regulated by it. Virtue, in this regard, is the ability to judge between virtuous and vicious actions, not only in a
general sense, but with regards to appropriate actions at a given time and place. For example, distinguishing
courageous acts from reckless and cowardly is an act of prudence.

It is an intellectual and moral virtue that seeks to direct particular human acts through righteousness, towards a
good end. With it being a moral virtue, it is not possible to be prudent and not morally good in the process as the
prudent man does the good as opposed to the person who only knows the good.

This word has also become synonymous to cautiousness. The word prudence may imply a reluctance to take risks,
which remains a virtue with respect to unnecessary risks. Prudence is the application of universal principles to
particular situations, and so an understanding of universal moral principles is absolutely necessary. But since
prudence deals in particulars, in the here and now of real situations, a number of other intellectual qualities are also
necessary if one is to choose rightly, qualities that one does not necessarily acquire in a classroom setting. St.
Thomas refers to these as integral parts of prudence, without which there is no prudence, just as there is no house
without a roof, walls, and a foundation.

Prudence was considered by the ancient Greeks and later on by Christian philosophers, most notably Thomas
Aquinas, as the cause, measure and form of all virtues. It is considered to be the auriga virtutum or the charioteer of
the virtues.

It is the cause in the sense that the virtues, which are defined to be the "perfected ability" of man as a spiritual
person (spiritual personhood in the classical western understanding means having intelligence and free will), achieve
their "perfection" only when they are founded upon prudence, that is to say upon the perfected ability to make right
decisions.

For instance, a person can live temperance when he has acquired the habit of deciding correctly the actions to take
in response to his instinctual cravings.

Its function is to point out which course of action is to be taken in any concrete circumstances. It has nothing to do
with directly willing the good it discerns. Prudence has a directive capacity with regard to the other virtues. It lights
the way and measures the arena for their exercise. Without prudence, bravery becomes foolhardiness; mercy sinks
into weakness, and temperance into fanaticism. Its office is to determine for each in practice those circumstances of
time, place, manner, etc. which should be observed, and which the Scholastics comprise under the term "medium
rationis". So it is that while it qualifies the intellect and not the will, it is nevertheless rightly styled a moral virtue.
Prudence is considered the measure of moral virtues since it provides a model of ethically good actions. "The work of
art is true and real by its correspondence with the pattern of its prototype in the mind of the artist. In similar fashion,
the free activity of man is good by its correspondence with the pattern of prudence." (Josef Pieper)

In Greek and Scholastic philosophy, "form" is the specific characteristic of a thing that makes it what it is. With this
language, prudence confers upon other virtues the form of its inner essence; that is, its specific character as a virtue.
For instance, not all acts of telling the truth are considered good, considered as done with the virtue of honesty.
What makes telling the truth a virtue is whether it is done with prudence.

 Integral Parts of Prudence

Prudence begins with an understanding of the first principles of practical reason, which St. Thomas Aquinas calls
synderesis. It is a natural habit by which we are inclined to a number of ends. Now the good is the object of desire.
Hence, the object of these inclinations are goods. And since these goods are not outside the human person, but are
aspects of the human person, they are called human goods. There are a number of human goods to which every
human person is naturally inclined. These goods are not known by the senses, but by the intellect, and so they are
desired not by the sense appetite, but primarily by the will (the rational appetite), thus they are not sensible goods,
but intelligible goods.

These intelligible human goods include human life, the knowledge of truth, the intellectual apprehension and
enjoyment of beauty, leisure (play and art), sociability, religion, integrity, and marriage. Let us consider each one
individually.

Life: The human person has a natural inclination to preserve his life; for he sees his life as basically good.
Human existence is a rational animal kind of existence. It is basically good to be as a rational animal, created
in the image and likeness of God, in the image of knowledge and love (intellect and will). Human life is
specifically "cognitive" life, a life having the potential of self expansion through knowledge and through love.
Everything else in the physical universe exists to serve human life and is valued according to its ability to do
just that. Thus, everything in the physical universe is instrumentally good, while human life alone is basically
good (the human person alone was willed into existence by God for his own sake).

Truth: This human person, who is fundamentally, intelligibly, and intrinsically good, desires to know truth for
its own sake. As Aristotle says in his Metaphysics: "All men by nature desire to know". Knowing is a mode of
existing. In knowing anything, one becomes what one knows ("the intellect is in a way all things").
Knowledge is a kind of self-expansion. Man always desires to be more fully, and he exists most fully as a
knower, as a see-er. As Aristotle clearly saw, man's ultimate purpose in life clearly has something to do with
knowing, which is his highest activity and, according to Aquinas, "the highest mode of having".

Beauty: Man has, at the same time, a natural inclination to behold the beautiful, to see it, to intuit it, to
contemplate it. And so he visits art museums, listens to beautiful music, gazes at the sunset or the beautiful
face of a child, and he even contemplates the beauty of divine providence. Indeed, his ultimate purpose has
something to do with intuition, especially the intuition of beauty, and this is something that Plato
understood well (Cf. The Symposium, 210e-212b).

Leisure, Play, Art: Man is a maker. He brings all his sense and intellectual powers to bear upon the project of
producing works of art, such as paintings, poetry, sculptures, buildings, monuments, etc., just for the sake of
creating, or playing games just for the sake playing, such as golf, cards, chess, etc. Indeed, there is a
permanent and underlying element of contemplation in all of this. It is man the knower who leisures. The
person who plays has the cognitive power of complete self-reflection, and so he contemplates the marvel of
his own skills and delights in the awareness of their gradual perfection. He contemplates his gifts and detects
the giver underneath them. A good player is awed by the laws that he can detect behind an ordinary game
of chess, for example, and the players delight in the intuition of the beauty of the execution of a well-
planned strategy that resulted in a touchdown or a goal or a homerun. Even spectators contemplate and
discuss these plays typically after the game. Contemplation permeates the leisure of play and art carried out
for their own sake. If it did not, no one would leisure.
 Sociability: The human person inclines to harmony between himself and others. He is a social and political
animal. He is born into a family and discovers himself through others, such as his parents and siblings. He
tends to establish friendships. He is glad to "see" his friends, to "hear" their voices. Ultimately, he wills to
share the good that has come to him. Above all, he desires to share what he "sees" or knows with others.
And others desire to share with him all that they have been gratuitously given, especially what they possess
in knowledge (for knowledge is the highest mode of possessing anything). These others enable him to see
what he was unable to see before. The perspectives they bring to him enlarge him, and they likewise are
enlarged by what he brings them. His friendships are not merely utilitarian. Rather, the highest kind of
friendship he seeks is benevolent friendship (EN 8. 3, 1156b6). He has only a few genuine friends with whom
he can share himself on such a profound level. But he inclines towards them, becausegoodness is self-
diffusive, and the more he is given, the more he wills to share what he has been given, and this is above all
the case with what he "sees" or beholds, that is, what he knows, what he intuits or contemplates. Delighting
in the presence of friends is nothing less than seeing. It is a form of contemplation.

Religion: Man aspires after what is higher than himself because he is aware of a desire in him for perfect
happiness. He beholds his own finitude and the finitude of creation. He aspires to what is beyond the
temporal to the eternal, yet he cannot transcend the limits of his nature. But he dreams about it (as we see
in Plato). He seeks to know the giver behind the gift of his existence, that is, behind the gift that is creation.
As a spiritual nature, he is open to the whole of reality, the whole of being (universal being). He seeks to
know the "whole of reality", that is, to possess the bonum universale. We know from revelation that he is
not going to attain it on his own. He might think, as Plato did, that death will free him from the temporal in
order to enter into the realm of the "really real" so as to contemplate subsistent beauty. And that might very
well be the case. But revelation tells us that this can only happen through God's initiative. He cannot,
through his own natural faculties, attain God. If he is to attain the bonum universale, it can only be through
another gratuitous giving (distinct from creation). He depends upon the divine initiative. In fact, even his
own natural happiness is dependent upon the gratuitous self-giving of others; for he cannot force people to
be his friends. And so this dependency upon the divine initiative is not out of place at all, for man knows
already that an element of his own happiness is the feeling of having a debt that cannot be paid.

Marriage: Man is inclined to marry, to give himself completely to another, to belong to another exclusively
in one flesh union. Even a marriage consummated by sexual union is a kind of knowing. Mary says to the
angel Gabriel: "I do not know man" (Lk 1, 35). The giving of oneself in the marital act is a revealing of oneself
to the other. One allows oneself to be known, and one gives oneself in order to be known by the other in a
way that is exclusive and thus closed off to others. Marriage is a special kind of knowledge of persons. Love
wills that the other see or behold what it knows, especially conjugal love. And both husband and wife will to
beget human life, because goodness is effusive, and their unique conjugal relationship is good. They desire
that a new life, the fruit of their love, share in what they know, namely the relationship they have with one
another (as well as with others, with creation, and with God).

Integrity: Man is inclined to seek integration within himself, an integration of the complex elements of
himself. This is because he seeks to be most fully, and one (along with good, beauty, and true) is a property
of being. He is inclined to bring about a more intense unity within himself, namely harmony between his
actions and his character as well as his will and his passions. Bringing order to the passions (cultivating
temperance and fortitude) is a means to an end. A person aims to be temperate and brave for the sake of
possessing the highest good, the possession of which is threatened by excessive sensuality and emotional
disorder.

These are the primary principles of practical reason. They are the starting points of human action, the motivating
principles behind every genuinely human action that we choose to perform. Now the very first principle of morality
is self-evident and is presupposed in every human action. That principle is: good is to be done, evil is to be avoided.

These are the elements that must be present for any complete or perfect act of the virtue.

 Memoria/Memory: accurate memory that is true to reality; an ability to learn from experience.
If prudence were merely the knowledge of universal moral principles, we could stop here. But it is much more
than that. Prudence requires a sensitivity and atonement to the here and now of the real world of real people. It
requires a great deal of experience. That is why Aquinas lists memory as in integral part of the virtue of
prudence, for experience is the result of many memories.

There is more to memory than the simple recall of facts. Memory is more an ability to learn from experience.
And so it involves an openness to reality, a willingness to allow oneself to be measured by what is real. This
quality of openness is not as widespread as we might tend to believe at first. Some people just don't seem to
learn from experience, that is, they don't seem to remember how this or that person reacted to their particular
way of relating to them, for they continue to make the same mistakes in their way of relating to others. It is as if
they have no memory of last week, or last month, or last year. They lack a "true to being" memory because they
do not will to conform to what is real, but have made a stubborn decision to have reality conform to the way
they want the world to be. That is why the study of history is so important for the development of political
prudence; for how often have we heard the old adage that those who do not learn from history are condemned
to repeat its mistakes?

 Docilitas/Docility: an open-mindedness that recognizes variety and is able to seek and make use of the
experience and authority of others.

Those who lack memory will more than likely lack docility, another integral part of prudence. St. Thomas writes:

“...prudence is concerned with particular matters of action, and since such matters are of infinite variety, no one
man can consider them all sufficiently; nor can this be done quickly, for it requires length of time. Hence in
matters of prudence man stands in very great need of being taught by others, especially by old folk who have
acquired a sane understanding of the ends in practical matters. (S.T. II-II Q 49, 3)”

Docility is open-mindedness, and so it requires a recognition of one's own limitations and ready acceptance of
those limits. Proud people who hope excessively in their own excellence will tend to make imprudent decisions
because they fail to rely on others by virtue of their inordinate and unrealistic self-estimation. A person with
false docility seeks the advice of others, but only those deemed most likely to be in agreement with him, or of
those of similar depravity and who are thus unlikely to challenge the overall orientation of his life.

 Intelligentia: The understanding of first principles.

 Sollertia/Shrewdness: quick-wittedness or the ability to evaluate a situation quickly.

Shrewdness is the ability to quickly size up a situation on one's own, and so it involves the ability to pick up small
clues and run with them. The shrewd are highly intuitive, subtle and discreet. A shrewd teacher, for example, will
pick up subtle clues that reveal just who it is he is dealing with in his classroom and what the needs of his
students really are, which allow him to determine quickly the approach best suited to their particular way of
learning. The shrewd are also able to detect evil behind a mask of goodness, so as to be able to plan accordingly.
Some people are dangerously unsuspecting of the motives of evil and so they miss the clues that suggest a more
ominous picture. For we tend to see in others what we see in ourselves, and if our motives are good, it is hard to
suspect others of malice. Moreover, excessive empathy has a way of clouding the intuitive light of solertia
(Greek: phronimos).

But just as memory and docility presuppose a good will (right appetite), so too does shrewdness. It can be the
case that the inability to see is rooted in a will not to see; for sometimes people would rather not think about
what the clues could mean for fear of what they might discover about someone, which in turn will affect their
security in some way. As the old saying goes: "There are none so blind as those who will not see". It can also be
the case that a person has not learned to listen to his intuition or perhaps confuses a negative intuition with
judging the heart of another and so dismisses his intuitive insights, especially negative ones. On the other hand,
it is possible that a person wants to see evil where there really is none. This is not shrewdness, but suspicion, and
it is often rooted in a spirit of pride.

 Ratio/Reasoning: Discursive reasoning and the ability to research and compare alternatives
Once a person sizes up a particular situation, he needs to be able to investigate and compare alternative
possibilities and to reason well from premises to conclusions. He will need to be able to reason about what
needs to be done, that is, what the best alternative or option is that will realize the right end. Prudence thus
presupposes a knowledge of the basics of logical reasoning. If a person cannot see through the most common
logical fallacies, he will unlikely be able to consistently make prudent decisions.

Some of these common fallacies include Begging the Question, or assuming the point that needs to be proven,
or Ignoring the Question, which consists in proving something other than the point to be established. False
Cause consists in assuming that when one event precedes another, it is the cause of the succeeding event. The
Fallacy of Part and Whole consists in attributing to a whole what belongs only to its parts (the fallacy of
generalization), while the Fallacy of Misplaced Authority consists in concluding that something is true because
somebody of authority, such as a medical doctor, said it. The Fallacy of Ad Hominem (directed to the man)
involves the rejection of some person's position not by virtue of the argument itself, but by virtue of some
unlikeable aspect of the person. The Fallacy of the Double Standard consists in applying one standard for one
group or individual, and another standard for an opposing group or individual. Appeal to the People occurs when
a speaker attempts to get some group to agree to a particular position by appealing solely to their bigotry,
biases, and prejudices or, in some cases, merely to their desire to hear what they already believe. The Fallacy of
False Analogy occurs when a person argues a position merely by drawing an analogy, without justifying the use
of the analogy. And the Fallacy of Novelty assumes that what is new and current is necessarily better or an
improvement upon what is older. The more adept one becomes at seeing through such deceptive reasoning, the
less likely will one's decisions fall under its influence.

 Providentia/Foresight: the capacity to estimate whether particular actions can realize goals.

Foresight is the principal part of prudence, for the name itself (prudence) is derived from the Latin providential,
which means "foresight". Foresight involves rightly ordering human acts to the right end. This of course
presupposes that the person is ordered to the right end, which is the possession of God through knowledge and
love. The greater his love for God, that is, the greater his charity, the greater will be his foresight: "Blessed are
the pure in heart; for they shall see God" (Mt. 5, 8). For it is through charity that one attains God, and it is
through this supernatural friendship that one grows in a connatural knowledge of God. The more a person is
familiar with the city towards which he directs his steps, the more able he is to see which roads lead to that end
and which roads lead away. The more a person is familiar with God, the more readily able he is to discern
behaviour inconsistent with that friendship. An impure heart, that is, a love of God mixed with an inordinate love
of self, will affect one's ability to "see". An inordinate love of self will cause certain alternatives to have greater
appeal, but these alternatives (means) will not necessarily lead to the right end. A prudent man sees that, but
the imprudent do not. And if they lack true to being memory, they will continue to fail to see it.

 Circumspection: the ability to take all relevant circumstances into account.

It is possible that acts good in themselves and suitable to the end may become unsuitable in virtue of new
circumstances. Circumspection is the ability to take into account all relevant circumstances. Showing affection to
your spouse through a kiss is good in itself, but it might be unsuitable in certain circumstances, such as a funeral
or in a public place. Telling certain jokes might be appropriate in one setting, but inappropriate in another.

Circumspection is the ability to discern which is which. This too, however, presupposes right appetite. A person
lacking proper restraint (temperance) will lack thoughtfulness and the ability to consider how the people around
him might be made to feel should he take a certain course of action. The lustful, for example, lack counsel and
tend to act recklessly. An egoist is also less focused on others and more on himself, and so he too tends to lack
proper circumspection.

 Caution: the ability to mitigate risk.

Good choices can often generate bad effects. To choose not to act simply because bad consequences will likely
ensue is contrary to prudence. But caution takes care to avoid those evils that are likely to result from a good act
that we contemplate doing. For example, a priest who is about to speak out publicly against a piece of unjust
legislation might anticipate offending members of his congregation. Out of cowardice or an inordinate love of
 comfort, he might choose not to say anything at all and thus risk harming others through his silence. A prudent
priest, on the other hand, will speak out when not doing so will harm others, yet caution will move him to
prepare his congregation with a thorough preamble so as to minimize the chances of misunderstanding. One
must never do evil that good may come of it, but one may at times permit evil on condition that the action one is
performing is good or indifferent, that one does not will or intend the evil effect, and that the good effects of
one's action are sufficiently desirable to compensate for the allowing of the evil effect.

 Prudential judgment

In ethics, a "prudential judgment" is one where the circumstances must be weighed to determine the correct action.
Generally, it applies to situations where two people could weigh the circumstances differently and ethically come to
different conclusions.

For instance, in the theory of just war, the government of a nation must weigh whether the harms they suffer are
more than the harms that would be produced by their going to war against another nation that is harming them; the
decision whether to go to war is therefore a prudential judgment.

In another case, a patient who has a terminal illness with no conventional treatment may hear of an experimental
treatment. To decide whether to take it would require weighing on one hand, the cost, time, possible lack of benefit,
and possible pain, disability, and hastened death, and on the other hand, the possible benefit and the benefit to
others of what could be learned from his case.

 Potential Parts of Prudence

1. Good Counsel (eubolia)

Counsel is research into the various means to the end and the circumstances. A person not entirely pure of
heart, that is, whose charity is very defective, will have more options before him, poorer options that
nevertheless have some appeal. The better the character, the less will these poorer options present themselves;
for they will drop out of the picture very quickly. This can be compared to a person who is physically healthy and
has good eating habits and one who is unhealthy with poor habits. A typical menu will be more appealing to the
one with poor eating habits, while the former deliberates over a few options, the healthier options on the menu.
We've all heard the expression, "Where there is a will, there is a way". Good counsel, resulting from a greater
hope in and love for God, generates the energy and imagination needed to discover the best alternative to
achieve the best end.

2. Good Judgment (synesis and gnome)

Judgment is an assent to good and suitable means. Synesis is good common sense in making judgments about
what to do and what not to do in ordinary matters. It is possible to take good counsel without having good sense
so as to judge well, but to judge well on what to do or not to do in the here and now requires a right mind, that
is, an understanding of first principles and precepts and indirectly a just will and well disposed appetites (both
concupiscible and irascible appetites). Without these, one's ideas will likely be distorted, and one's judgment
regarding the best means will be defective; for as Aristotle points out, as a person is (character), so does he see.
He writes:

“...what seems good to a man of high moral standards is truly the object of wish, whereas a
worthless man wishes anything that strikes his fancy. It is the same with the human body:
people whose constitution is good find those things wholesome which really are so, while other
things are wholesome for invalids, and similarly their opinions will vary as to what is bitter,
sweet, hot, heavy, and so forth. (Just as a healthy man judges these matters correctly, so in
moral questions) a man whose standards are high judges correctly, and in each case what is truly
good will appear to him to be so. Thus, what is good and pleasant differs with different
characteristics or conditions, and perhaps the chief distinction of a man of high moral standards
is his ability to see the truth in each particular moral question, since he is, as it were, the
standard and measure for such questions. The common run of people, however, are misled by
 pleasure. For though it is not the good, it seems to be, so that they choose the pleasant in the
belief that it is good and avoid pain thinking that it is evil. (EN 3, 4. 1113a25-1113b)”

Gnome refers to the ability to discern and apply higher laws to matters that fall outside the scope of the more
common or lower rules that typically guide human action. It involves good judgment regarding exceptions to
ordinary rules. For example, students ordinarily are not permitted to play walkmans in a classroom, but a
possible exception to the rule might be the case of a student with a serious learning disability and who is highly
sensitive to the slightest distractions. One may be able to think of similar examples on a more judicial level.