Prudence in Politics

Prudence is concerned with right action and requires deliberation, judgment, decision and execution. Wisdom understands what is right; prudence involves making the right decision and implementing it well. Prudence takes account of limitations in a world of constraints and strives to achieve the greatest measure of justice - the greatest good possible - under the particular circumstances.

Although politics is perhaps the first arena that comes to mind when we think about prudence, prudence is a virtue first cultivated or neglected in our personal lives. Americans live in a culture of choice. Choice is a major theme of marketing. We shape our identity and our legacy through our choices. We make hundreds of choices a day, from the trivial to the profound, and we love to choose. When I asked my six-year-old daughter to get ready to go grocery shopping with me, she looked me in the eye and asked, "What are my options?"

We spend much more time making choices than we do thinking about making good ones. What are our goals and priorities? Are they the right ones? How will we use our time and resources? Who can give us good counsel? What is the right decision in these circumstances? And, having made a decision, how do we implement it effectively?

But considerations of prudence inevitably extend to public policy and politics. Questions about the goals of politics, the purpose of law, the effective use of law, the moral boundaries of law, are as old as the Greek philosopher Aristotle.

These concerns were traditionally debated against the backdrop of the classical virtue of prudence. Greek, Roman, Stoic and Christian philosophers, like Aristotle, Seneca, Cicero, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant, reflected on the nature and application of prudence. Political leaders like Edmund Burke and William Wilberforce, and American founders like Thomas Jefferson, John Jay and John Adams expressly relied on prudential decision making.

A prudential political (and legislative) strategy focuses on worthy goals, identifies effective means to achieve those ends and the wise use of limited resources, recognises the limitations of the fallen world and its constraints on political action, and seeks to preserve the possibility of future progress. A prudential approach balances zeal with knowledge, especially knowledge of the current obstacles and of effective ways to overcome them...

Prudence is not pragmatism; prudence requires moral purpose. Prudence aims to achieve the greatest good possible in the concrete circumstances. Prudence does not require an all-or-nothing approach to public policy. In fact, an all-or-nothing approach, generally speaking, is often neither prudent nor effective. An all-or-nothing approach is not dictated by divine or natural law, moral philosophy, or ethics. Prudence must necessarily guide the consideration of constraints and contingencies in politics, especially when lawmakers begin to grapple with the specifics of legislation and efforts to limit unjust laws and conditions.

- Clarke D. Forsythe, Politics for the Greatest Good: The Case for Prudence in the Public Square