150. Prudence and Its Subordinate Virtues: Counsel, Judgment, and Command

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Three Acts of Practical Reason #

Thomas identifies three ordered acts of practical reason concerning things to be done:

1. Counsel (consilium): Investigation and inquiry about possible courses of action
2. Judgment (iudicium): Determining what should be done
3. Command (imperium): The principal act, directing the will to action

Prudence (foresight/φρόνησις) is chiefly the virtue of commanding well. The other virtues are subordinate to this principal act.

Subordinate Virtues and Their Ordering #

Eubulia (good counsel): The virtue of taking counsel well. It is not itself prudence but a virtue subject to and subordinated to prudence. Just as MacArthur would gather officers to discuss options before making judgment and command, eubulia perfects the investigative phase.

Synesis (judgment in ordinary matters): Judges according to common law. This is distinguished from gnome by operating within established general principles.

Gnome (judgment in particular difficulties): Judges according to natural reason when common law is lacking or insufficient. Operates when circumstances require departure from general rules.

Why Two Virtues for Judgment but Only One for Counsel #

The key distinction rests on the nature of investigation versus judgment:

• Counsel/Investigation: Does not yet reach particular principles. Once particular principles are known, investigation ceases—there is no need for further inquiry. Therefore, one virtue (eubulia) suffices.

• Judgment: Requires knowledge of proper principles private to each subject matter. Different domains have fundamentally different ways of proceeding and different principles. Therefore, multiple virtues are necessary.

The Private Principles of Different Sciences #

Berquist emphasizes: “You can’t judge well if you don’t know what road to follow in each science. Each science has its own road.”

Different methods of judging correspond to different sciences:

• Natural Philosophy: Judges by returning to the senses. As both Aristotle and Einstein say, natural philosophy begins with the senses and ends with the senses.

• Geometry: Judges by returning to imagination, not senses. The geometer abstracts surface from sensible matter and imagines perfectly flat surfaces, which physical reality never provides.

• Logic: Judges by returning to reason and the universal. The first thing to be considered in logic is the universal, which cannot be imagined but must be understood.

• Theology: Judges by returning to Scripture and Revelation. One cannot judge divine matters by imagination or sensible analysis (e.g., the Eucharist is not judged by chemical analysis).

The Example of Wine-Making #

Berquist’s son-in-law makes wine in California. Different grape varieties require different conditions:

• What is good for Cabernet Sauvignon is not good for Chardonnay
• Wood type, barrel seasoning, terroir, temperature all differ by grape variety
• The winemaker must know what is private to each particular grape

This illustrates why synesis and gnome are distinguished: one operates within common principles, the other within the specialized knowledge of particular domains.

The Geometry vs. Natural Philosophy Distinction #

Berquist discusses why the “philosophy of the continuous” (showing that the continuous is divisible forever and composed of no indivisibles) appears in the sixth book of the Physics, not in Euclid:

• Geometry proceeds from simple to composed (plane geometry → solid geometry; circles → spheres; squares → cubes)
• Natural Philosophy proceeds from general to particular
• The general consideration of the continuous belongs to the order of natural philosophy, not geometry
• This reflects the via or method proper to each science

The classical text on these distinctions is Boethius’s De Trinitate, which distinguishes the road of natural philosophy, mathematics, and wisdom.

The Relationship to Speculative Knowledge #

Berquist notes that in speculative matters, similar distinctions exist:

• Dialectic: Inquires about all things from probable opinions (universal method)
• Demonstrative sciences: Judge each according to its own proper principles (particular methods)
• Sophistic: Also about all things, but in an apparent/mistaken way

This parallels the practical realm: eubulia is like dialectic (investigating generally), while synesis and gnome are like demonstrative sciences (judging according to proper principles).

Common Mistakes in Judgment #

Berquist warns of confusion caused by mixing methods:

1. Using imagination in logic: Replacing the universal (which cannot be imagined) with the class or integral whole (which can be imagined). The universal “student” applies to each individual student; the class “students” is merely a multitude that can be pictured.

2. Using sensible judgment in divine matters: Attempting to picture the Trinity leads to errors like imagining “three things rolled into one big ball.”

3. Hegelian error: Proceeding from the most general and confused ideas (Being → Non-being → Becoming) to generate all reality, confusing the order of our confused knowledge with the order of things.

Key Arguments #

Why Judgment Requires Distinguishing Synesis and Gnome #

Objection: Why are there two virtues for judgment (synesis and gnome) but only one for counsel (eubulia)? This seems asymmetrical.

Response:

• Counsel is investigation, which ceases once particular principles are discovered—no multiplicity needed
• Judgment operates with diverse particular principles: each subject matter has its own proper principles
• The distinction between synesis and gnome reflects this diversity of proper principles
• Synesis judges using common principles (shared general rules)
• Gnome judges using natural reason in cases where common law is insufficient

The Example of Speed Limits #

Berquist illustrates gnome: Normally one should obey speed limits (synesis: judgment according to common law). But encountering an ambulance with sirens, one might break the speed limit to let it pass. This requires gnome: judgment that natural reason recognizes the exception when common rules are inadequate.

Important Definitions #

Eubulia (εὐβουλία): “Good counsel” - the virtue perfecting the act of taking counsel well. It is subordinate to prudence, not itself prudence.

Sinesis/Synesis (σύνεσις): “Judgment in ordinary matters” - the virtue of judging well about things to be done according to common, established law (κανών).

Gnome (γνώμη): “Right judgment in difficult matters” - the virtue of judging well by natural reason when common law is lacking or inadequate to particular circumstances.

Via (ὁδός): The proper method or “road” of proceeding particular to each science. Each science has its own via, and confusion of methods leads to error.

Integral whole vs. Universal: An integral whole is a multitude that can be imagined (e.g., a class of students as a collection); a universal applies to each individual and cannot be imagined (e.g., “student” as predicated of each student).

Examples & Illustrations #

The Three Friends in Quebec #

Berquist’s brother Mark had two friends illustrating the three acts:

• First friend: Imaginative, proposed many options to do (good at counsel/inquiry)
• Second friend (Mark): Had good judgment about which option they should choose (good at judgment)
• Third friend: Good at executing/commanding the action

Together they divided the three acts of practical reason among themselves. The example shows these are distinct capabilities.

Augustine’s Conversion #

A man deciding to give up sin illustrates the insufficiency of judgment alone:

• He makes a good judgment: “I should give up this sinful life”
• But this judgment does not immediately result in action
• He must take the further step of commanding himself to act
• Judgment alone is insufficient; command must follow

MacArthur’s Military Operations #

Berquist notes that MacArthur would gather his leading officers to discuss what they should do (good counsel), then make a judgment about the best course, then issue commands. This shows the three acts in practiced sequence.

The Ambulance on Main Street in Shrewsbury #

An ambulance with sirens approaches at speed limit. The driver encounters a choice: follow the common law (speed limit) or exercise natural reason recognizing the exceptional situation. This requires gnome—judgment that the common rule is inadequate here.

Wine-Making and Terroir #

Different grape varieties (Cabernet, Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc) require different conditions: wood type, barrel seasoning, temperature, soil. What works for one variety fails for another. The winemaker must know the proper principles private to each grape—an illustration of why judgment requires knowledge of particular principles.

Notable Quotes #

“You can’t judge well if you don’t know what road to follow in each science. Each science has its own road.”

“In all powers that are ordered, that is the chiefest, which is ordered to the chiefest, the principal act most principal. But about things to be done, human things to be done, three acts of reason are found. Of which the first is to take counsel, the second is to judge, and the third is to command.”

“The distinction is not in the general principles, but in the private ones.”

“Natural philosophy begins with the senses and ends with the senses.”

“Prudence is bene praeceptiva—well commanding—to which the others are ordered as secondary: eubulia, which takes counsel well, and synesis and gnome, which are the indicative parts.”

Questions Addressed #

Q: Why are there two virtues for judgment but only one for counsel? #

A: Because counsel is investigation, which does not yet reach particular principles. Once particular principles are known, investigation ceases—no further inquiry is needed. Judgment, however, operates with diverse proper principles private to each subject matter. Since different sciences and domains have different proper principles, multiple forms of judgment are necessary: synesis for judgment according to common law, and gnome for judgment when common law is inadequate.

Q: How do different sciences judge differently? #

A: Each science has its own proper method (via). Natural philosophy judges by returning to sense experience; geometry judges by returning to imagination; logic judges by returning to reason and the universal; theology judges by returning to Scripture and Revelation. One cannot judge well without knowing which road (method) belongs to each science.

Q: What is the difference between synesis and gnome? #

A: Synesis judges according to common law—the established general principles. Gnome judges according to natural reason in particular difficulties where common law is lacking or insufficient. The example of speed limits illustrates this: normally one obeys the common rule (synesis), but encountering an ambulance requires natural reason to recognize the exception (gnome).

Q: Why does counsel not similarly divide into multiple virtues? #

A: Counsel is investigation (inquisitio), which has not yet reached particular principles. Investigation ceases once the principles are discovered. Therefore, one virtue suffices. But judgment requires knowledge of the proper principles private to each subject matter, and since these principles differ, multiple virtues of judgment are necessary.