Skip to main content

The Prodigal Son and the Magnificent Man // Abigale Bell

 "...Quick! Bring the finest robe in the house and put it on him. Get a ring for his finger and sandals for his feet. And kill the calf we have been fattening. We must celebrate with a feast..." (Luke 15:22-23)

A man has two sons; one older, and one younger. The younger son decides to take all of his inheritance right away. His father gives him his money so he leaves home, and spends it all on lavish living. As soon as the money runs out, a famine strikes the land and the son is left starving. After working as a farm hand and being so hungry that even the pigs' food looks appetizing, the son decides to return home and beg for a place as a servant in his father's house. Instead of scorning him for wasting his money so foolishly, the father welcomes him home and showers him with rich gifts. 

This is the story of the prodigal son. As I read what Aristotle had to say about prodigality, I couldn't help but think of this story in the Bible. I must confess, I didn't understand the meaning of the word "prodigal" until Aristotle brought it to my attention. I have always thought "prodigal" had a positive meaning akin to: one who returns home. Instead, the word has a negative connotation. The prodigal man is the one who spends what he has foolishly and flippantly.  

Aristotle discusses the mean of virtues. Prodigality is on the excessive side of the spectrum in relation to wealth, with liberality as the mean. This idea can be seen in the characters of Luke 15. 

Looking at this story from Aristotle's point of view, I immediately see the son as having the excessive quality of prodigality. He has squandered his fortune on temporary pleasures. The son fulfills quite well the definition of "prodigal." 

The father, however, is harder to place. He seems, at first, to display not a virtue, but a vice. Of liberality Aristotle says, on page 32, "Therefore the liberal man, like other virtuous men, will give for the sake of the noble, and rightly; for he will give to the right people, the right amounts, and at the right time..." The father invests his money (his son's inheritance) in his youngest son before the appointed time. He allows his son to go off and live how he wants. This seems to display prodigality rather than liberality. In the end, when the son returns home, the father lavishes riches on his son. Again, an example of a bad investment?

If we were to look through the father's eyes for a moment, we would see only a loved child; not a bad investment, but a great one. We would see a son who recognized the error of his ways and turned from it. In this light, the father represents not only liberality, but even magnificence, as Aristotle would call it. This is in the sense that the father gave freely, without calculation. He also gave greatly, bestowing expensive gifts on his returned son. Here, the giving far outweighed the gain, or maybe, to the father, it didn't.  According to Aristotle, magnificence is a step beyond liberality in that a magnificent man will go the extra mile by giving with grand ceremony. The father throws a party for his son's return, and he gives rich gifts with an air of grandeur. Here we see the quality of magnificence displayed.


...Commented on Rachael's and Braylan's posts.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lovers of Wisdom, Not Power—Lily Caswell

In Book VIII of Plato’s Republic, Socrates talks about the possibility of having a well-governed city. However, he also talks about how that particular form of government is impossible to have. A well-governed city becomes a possibility only if you can discover a better way of life for your future rulers than holding office.” (Plato, p 215) Maybe his version of a better life was for those in office to not be lovers of power, since it would then become a fight among rival lovers. Socrates gets to the point that the only rulers who don’t love power are true philosophers. Philosophers are lovers of wisdom and knowledge and not power, ergo they are the perfect rulers. Absolute power corrupts and power corrupts absolutely, so I’m thinking that maybe the trick to being a good ruler is for you to be a philosophical person who loves wisdom and not power. I commented on Jamie’s and Isabelle’s posts.
4 comments
Read more

How to Make a Clone - Clabo

I found books three and four to be very cringy. I mean, to me the idea of structurally producing good soldiers/guardians through heavy censorship is somewhat inhumane. I feel as if human beings should be allowed to experience every bit of knowledge they can at some point in their lives. To me, it seems as if the guardians are being guarded against information throughout their entire lives so they can solely fulfill the duties they were birthed into.  However, the influence and importance Plato places on poetry and music do make me wonder what it would be like if we had the same values as our military today. What if the United States military invested in the souls of its soldiers and placed within them emotional and intellectual values outside of what they have learned previously. Perhaps the military instills values and principles within soldiers to fulfill the same purpose as the guardians would in Plato's Republic and that is to only be that which the government wants you to be....
5 comments
Read more

Dystopian Origins Uncovered ////// Isabelle Ferguson

  I think that ideas eventually run out of originality and circle back to the original idea. During this week's reading, many of Socrates’ suggestions for a place of perfection reminded me of some novels I’ve read depicting dystopian worlds. Disclaimer: There are spoilers ahead. You have been warned.        To begin, in  The  Giver  by Lois Lowry censorship is a major theme. The novel is centered around a boy who is receiving memories withheld from the population! The government in The Giver is especially careful to censor the memories that may cause strife, anger, fear, sadness, etc. In the adults, this society is cemented. So, the government is especially strict with the youth. Socrates talks about verses to “obliterate” to prevent the descriptions from doing “harm to our future warriors” for the better half of Book III (Plato, page 44). The warriors he speaks of are the youth. He goes on to list the multitude of verses that should be done ...
7 comments
Read more