Positive psychology steve baumgardner marie crothers

Readings

Read pp. 207-221 of Ch. 10 of Positive Psychology.

CheckPoint

Human Virtues and Character Strengths

Examine one human virtue and the associated character strengths that are important to you, as listed in Ch. 10 of Positive Psychology.

Select someone who you know or is a public figure who you feel encompasses at least one of these virtues.

Discuss why this virtue is important to you. How does the person you selected encompass this virtue and the associated character strengths?

Post a 200- to 300-word response.

Think of someone you hold in high regard and look up to as a model for yourself and others.
Perhaps a friend, relative, or a person from history or contemporary society comes to
mind. Think about this individual’s personal qualities and how you might describe the
basis of your admiration to another person. Make a mental list of 4 or 5 qualities that make this
person deserving of your respect. Now compare your list to the positive traits discussed in
Chapter 9. How many of them overlap? Did your list include extraversion, cheerfulness, selfesteem,
or optimism? What traits on your list are not in Chapter 9? Did you include any of the
following qualities: integrity, courage, honesty, kindness, religious conviction, wisdom, fairness,
or modesty? The point here, affirmed by how we think about people we respect, is that a
description of positive human traits would be incomplete without including personal qualities
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Developing a Classification of Human Virtues
Measuring Strengths of Character
Wisdom as a Foundational Strength and Virtue
What is Wisdom?
Theories of Wisdom
Balance Theory
Wisdom as Expert Knowledge in the Conduct of Life
Wisdom in Action: The SOC Model of Effective Life Management
Focus on Theory: Wisdom or Self-control as Master Virtues?
Transcendence: Religion and Spirituality
The Search for Meaning
Religion and Spirituality: The Diversity of Views
Defining Religion and Spirituality
Religion/Spirituality and Well-Being
Religious Orientation
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Religious Orientation
Quest Religious Orientation
Attachment Theory and Relationship to God
Styles of Religious Coping
“Explaining Religion versus Explaining Religion Away”
Religion and Virtue
Forgiveness
Gratitude
Focus on Research: Increasing Well-Being by Counting Your Blessings
10
Virtue and Strengths
of Character
207
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
208 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
judged as positive because they are “good” in
moral and ethical terms. Clearly, we may admire
people who are outgoing, upbeat, and positive
about the future. But just as clearly, and perhaps at a
deeper level, we also admire individuals who show
strengths of character that reflect virtuous qualities like
integrity, kindness, and compassion. In short, virtue
and character strengths belong on a list of positive
human traits.
The traits reviewed in Chapter 9 were evaluated
as positive because of their benefits to individual
well-being—specifically health, happiness, and
emotional well-being. Virtuous behavior may also
increase our life satisfaction and make life more
meaningful and healthy. However, virtue is also considered
a positive trait independent of any benefit or
“pay-off” to the individual. Virtue is positively
regarded in its own right because of its connection to
religious and secular mores and its value to society.
A consideration of virtue and character strengths provides
an additional way to think about the meaning
of “positive.” In this chapter, we will first review a
recent attempt to provide a comprehensive classification
of character strengths and virtues. Then, we will
focus on two foundational virtues (wisdom and
religion) in more detail by examining how they contribute
to well-being and a life well-lived.
DEVELOPING A CLASSIFICATION
OF HUMAN VIRTUES
For a considerable time in psychology’s history,
virtue was not considered an appropriate construct
for scientific investigation. The study of virtue was
thought to be too easily tainted and biased by the
moral beliefs of researchers and the prevailing cultural
mores of the day (Tjeltveit, 2003). Many psychologists
believed that science should provide only
objective facts about how people act. Questions
about how people should conduct themselves—that
is, whether their actions were good, bad, moral, or
immoral—were left for philosophers and theologians
to decide. However, a renewed interest in
character strengths has begun to emerge as more
psychologists have come to realize that a complete
account of human behavior needs to include the
moral dimension of people’s lives (Fowers &
Tjeltveit, 2003). Recent events from the Enron scandal
to the influence-peddling of lobbyist Jack
Abramoff have reinforced the importance of ethical
behavior. People’s anger and outrage at these sorts
of improprieties stem primarily from moral considerations.
In short, people lead moral lives in the sense
of evaluating themselves and others according to
moral criteria.
Describing the features of a life well-lived is a
central theme of positive psychology. Because the
meaning of a good person and a good life are intimately
connected to virtue, positive psychology has
given virtue particular prominence. This is most
apparent in a recent collaborative research project
(the Values in Action Project, Peterson & Seligman,
2004) that had the lofty goal of developing a classification
of character strengths and virtues that would
parallel the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM), developed by the
American Psychiatric Association (2000). The DSM
provides a classification of mental disorders and an
extensive “language” for describing human psychological
weaknesses and pathologies. Authors of the
Values in Action Project (VIA) hoped to create a
comprehensive classification system similar to the
DSM, but one that was focused on human strengths
rather than weaknesses. They also hoped to provide
a language describing positive human qualities that
defined a healthy person living a good life. Put
another way, the DSM describes aspects of life
“below zero” (with “zero” representing the threshold
dividing mental health from emotional illness). One
goal of the VIA was to describe life “above zero”
(i.e., to identify the traits that define emotional
health and strength). This goal is consistent with
positive psychology’s emphasis on restoring balance
to the field, in place of psychology’s historic focus
on problematic human behaviors.
Developing a classification of character
strengths is a daunting task. Virtue and character
are obviously complex topics. What, exactly, is a
human virtue or character strength? Do people have
a common understanding of traits that qualify as
virtuous? Getting answers to these questions was
one of the major purposes of the VIA. The VIA,
coordinated by Christopher Peterson and Martin
Seligman (2004), brought together a group of
researchers who sought to describe those strengths
of character that were most prominent across history
and culture. Is there a common set of human
qualities universally regarded as positive virtues? A
list of possible “candidates” was generated by examining
virtues and strengths described in a variety of
philosophic, religious, and cultural traditions. This
list included virtues described in major religions
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 209
and philosophies (e.g., Confucianism, Buddhism,
Hinduism, Judeo-Christianity, and ancient Greek
philosophy), the works of famous historical figures
(e.g., Benjamin Franklin), and in popular culture
(e.g., Boy and Girl Scout Guides, Hallmark greeting
cards, popular songs, Saturday Evening Post covers
by Normal Rockwell).
From a long list of candidates, 24 character
strengths were selected and organized around 6
virtues. The 6 virtues—wisdom, courage, humanity,
justice, temperance, and transcendence—were
selected because they appear to be universal
across history and across societies. They represent
moral virtues as defined by most religions and ethical
philosophies. Peterson and Seligman regard
these virtues as core defining features of good
character. Each virtue is defined by a set of character
strengths that represent the ingredients, expressions,
and potential means of developing the
virtue. For example, temperance as a virtue refers
to people’s strength in avoiding excesses. The
ingredients and expressions of temperance would
include self-control, gratitude toward others,
humility, prudent decision-making, and the ability
to forgive the transgressions of self and others.
Developing this virtue would involve efforts to
exert more self-control, become more humble and
less self-aggrandizing, and more grateful and forgiving
in relationships with others.
Character strengths were selected by applying
a set of criteria to the list of strengths identified in
the first phase of the project. A sample of the set of
criteria used is shown in Table 10.1. To be included
in the final classification, a character strength had to
meet all or nearly all of these criteria.
Half of the strengths selected met the entire set
of criteria. The other half did not. As Seligman and
Peterson note, disagreements can arise about the
inclusion of one or another of the strengths, the placement
of a given strength under a particular virtue, and
whether some other important strength was omitted.
However, taken in total, this classification system
“hangs together” as a reasonably coherent first effort
at describing what may be universally regarded as
human strengths and virtues. The final classification of
strengths and virtues is described in Table 10.2. For a
complete description of the selection criteria, previous
classification models, and literature reviews detailing
what is known about each character strength, see
Peterson and Seligman’s Character Strengths and
Virtues: A Handbook and Classification (2004).
Wisdom and Knowledge
As a virtue, wisdom refers to a general intellectual
strength involving the development and use of
knowledge. Wisdom does not necessarily follow
from a formal education or a high IQ score. Wisdom
refers to a more practical intelligence and good judgment
based on learning life’s lessons—perhaps
through hardships. A wise person puts things in the
proper perspective and avoids the pitfalls of narrowly
focused and self-interested understandings. Wisdom
means being able to offer good counsel to others
about how to live and how to understand and deal
with life’s challenges, uncertainties, and choices.
Courage
Courage is the emotional strength to overcome fear
in the face of opposition and adversity. Courage is
TABLE 10.1 Criteria for selecting character strengths
Regarded as a valued moral quality in and of itself, whether or not it led to concrete benefits.
Contributes to personal fulfillment in the sense of enhancing personal expressiveness, meaningfulness, satisfaction,
and happiness.
Constitutes a stable individual difference trait for which reliable measures had been previously developed.
Be distinctive and not overlap with other strengths.
Have an opposite that was clearly negative (e.g., the opposite of courage is cowardice).
Enhances rather than diminishes other people when expressed (i.e., the trait must evoke admiration or respect rather
than envy, inferiority, or lowered self-evaluation).
Be the focus of institutional efforts (e.g., education, churches) to promote its development.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
210 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
TABLE 10.2 Classification of virtues and character strengths
I. Wisdom and Knowledge—cognitive strengths that entail the acquisition and use of knowledge.
Defining Strengths
1. Creativity—thinking of novel and productive ways to do things
2. Curiosity—taking an interest in all ongoing experience
3. Open-mindedness—thinking things through and from all sides
4. Love of learning—mastering new skills, topics, and bodies of knowledge
5. Perspective—being able to provide wise counsel to others
II. Courage—emotional strengths that involve exercise of will in the face of opposition, external or internal.
Defining Strengths
6. Authenticity—speaking the truth and presenting yourself in a genuine way
7. Bravery—not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain
8. Persistence—finishing what one starts despite obstacles along the way
9. Zest—approaching life with excitement and energy
III. Humanity—interpersonal strengths that involve “tending and befriending” others.
Defining Strengths
10. Kindness—doing favors and good deeds for others
11. Love—valuing close relations with others
12. Social intelligence—being aware of the motives and feelings of self and others
IV. Justice—civic strengths that underlie healthy community life.
Defining Strengths
13. Fairness—treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice
14. Leadership—organizing group activities and seeing that they happen
15. Teamwork—working well as member of a group or team
V. Temperance—strengths that protect against excess.
Defining Strengths
16. Forgiveness—forgiving those who have done wrong
17. Modesty—letting one’s accomplishments speak for themselves
18. Prudence—being careful about one’s choices; not saying or doing things that might be later regretted
19. Self-regulation—regulating what one feels and does
VI. Transcendence—strengths that forge connections to the larger universe and providing meaning.
Defining Strengths
20. Appreciation of beauty and excellence—noticing and appreciating beauty, excellence, and/or skilled performance
in all domains of life
21. Gratitude—being aware of and thankful for good things that happen
22. Hope—expecting the best and working to achieve it
23. Humor—liking to laugh and tease; bringing smiles to other people
24. Religiousness/Spirituality—having coherent beliefs about the higher purposes and meaning of life
Source: Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of
interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421. Copyright American Psychological Association. Adapted and reprinted with
permission.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 211
exemplified in confronting and accepting one’s own
death; dealing with a debilitating illness or disease;
honestly confronting one’s own limitations, weaknesses,
or bad habits; and standing up for one’s
convictions, despite the possibility of negative consequences
(e.g., chastisement by others).
Humanity
Humanity refers to our capacity for sympathy, empathy,
compassion, and love in our relationships with
others. Humanity is the basis for nurturing and caring
relationships focused on another’s needs rather
than one’s own needs and interests. Humanity is
expressed in our willingness to help others in need,
to be kind, to be generous, and to respect the feelings
and values of others.
Justice
Justice is an essential ingredient in healthy societies,
communities, and relationships with others. This
virtue is shown when people are fair minded
and even-handed rather than being biased by selfinterest.
Justice also includes strengths that contribute
to community well-being, such as working
cooperatively with others and taking the initiative to
develop and follow through on goals and projects.
Temperance
Temperance is the strength to control excesses and
restrain impulses that may harm the self and others. It
expresses the idea of “willpower” in the face of temptations.
Temptations and the benefits of restraint
might be focused on eating; drinking; smoking;
expressing of anger, hatred, or arrogance toward others;
or excessive self-promotion at the expense of
others. Chapter 8 described some of the psychological
processes involved in self-control and selfdirected
actions that are relevant to temperance.
Temperance is a kind of ongoing self-awareness and
self-discipline that affirms the “look before you leap”
dictum of everyday wisdom. Temperance also
involves the ability to let go and forgive the indiscretions
and hurtful actions of others.
Transcendence
To transcend means to go beyond or rise above the
ordinary and the everyday. Transcendent thinking
lifts us out of the usual concrete preoccupations of
daily life and out of an individualized sense of self by
providing a broader view of the world and the universe.
Transcendence puts things in perspective and
keeps us from worrying about or striving for things
that don’t really matter. Religion and spirituality are
the clearest examples of transcendence because they
involve a belief in a higher power and a greater purpose
for life. Whatever their various forms, transcendent
beliefs connect the individual to a more
encompassing understanding and a deeper meaning
of life. The character strength of religiousness clearly
fits the virtue of transcendence.
The other strengths listed under transcendence
may not seem to fit so well. Peterson and Seligman
(2004) believe that the common theme here is providing
opportunities to appreciate and develop a bigger
picture of the world that may provide a more enduring
and satisfying understanding and purpose for life.
“Appreciation of beauty is a strength that connects
someone to excellence. Gratitude connects someone
directly to goodness. Hope connects someone directly
to the dreamed-of future” (Peterson & Seligman, 2004,
p. 519). Humor, they admit, seems a bit of stretch as
an expression of transcendence. However, as they
point out, humor keeps us from taking our selves and
our virtues too seriously. It reminds us to “lighten up.”
Laughter holds nothing sacred and can cut through
everything from self-righteousness to passionate conflicts
over important issues. On a daily basis, Jay Leno
and David Letterman create humor out of pain and
tragedy, from political scandals to the war in Iraq.
Perhaps humor serves a protective function by connecting
us directly to life’s absurdities and getting us
to laugh at them.
Measuring Strengths of Character
A major goal of the VIA project was the development
of measures for each of the 24 strengths of
character. Based on existing knowledge and assessment
instruments for each of the strengths, a 240-
item self-report questionnaire was created. Ten
items were used to assess each character strength.
For example, forgiveness is measured by items such
as, “I always allow others to leave their mistakes in
the past and make a fresh start.” Kindness is measured
by items like, “I’m never too busy to help a
friend.” Curiosity is measured through items such as,
“I am never bored.” Items like, “I always keep my
promises” measure integrity (Peterson & Seligman,
2004, pp. 629–630). Respondents rate their degree
of endorsement on a scale from 1 (very unlike me)
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
212 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
to 5 (very much like me). Rating summaries produce
a profile of an individual’s relative standing on each
of the 24 character strengths. The entire VIA inventory
of strengths takes 30 to 40 minutes to complete.
You can take the VIA inventory of strengths online
at www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/. There
are several questionnaires on this site. You want to
select the VIA Signature Strengths Questionnaire,
which gives you a character strength profile and
identifies your top five strengths, called “signature”
strengths. You will need to log on to the site, provide
some basic information, and create a password
to take the test and have your responses scored.
Although still a work in progress, the VIA
Strengths Inventory has shown good internal consistency
and test–retest reliability. Individual self-ratings
have been validated against ratings by informed
observers. A youth version of the VIA inventory has
also been developed and tested (see Peterson &
Seligman, 2004). The inventory has been taken by
over 350,000 people of all ages and backgrounds, representing
50 countries and all 50 U.S. states (Peterson,
2006; Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Seligman, Steen,
Park, & Peterson, 2005).
Analysis of character-strength profiles in relation
to respondents’ backgrounds revealed several interesting
patterns. People from around the world show substantial
agreement regarding the strengths rated as
“most like me.” The most commonly endorsed character
strengths in 50 countries were fairness, kindness,
authenticity, gratitude, and open-mindedness. The
least frequently endorsed strengths were prudence,
self-regulation, and modesty. The correlations of
strength rankings across nations were typically in the
0.80 range. Despite widely different cultures, religions,
and ethnic backgrounds, people seem to share
a common understanding of character strengths and
virtues. Within the United States, the same pattern of
rankings was apparent with the exception of religiousness,
which was stronger in the southern states.
Interestingly, there was less agreement in
rankings between U.S. teenagers and U.S. adults
than among adults from different countries.
American adolescents rated hope, teamwork, and
zest as “most like me,” while American adults gave
higher endorsements to authenticity, appreciation of
beauty, leadership, and open-mindedness.
Character strengths related to relationships
(love) and positive emotions (e.g., zest, hope, and
gratitude) were more strongly related to measures of
life satisfaction than were more intellectual-cognitive
strengths (e.g., curiosity and love of learning).
“Strengths of the heart,” as Peterson and Seligman
call them (experiences such as kindness, love, and
gratitude), contribute the most to our individual
happiness.
Profiles of character strength also fit with the
matching hypothesis discussed in Chapter 7. People
were asked to think about personal experiences
involving their most rewarding and fulfilling jobs
and hobbies, their “truest” love, and their best
friends. The experiences they chose as the “most
satisfying (they) had ever had” were those that
matched their character strengths. For example,
people strong in kindness enjoyed working as mentors
for others. Those with curiosity as strength valued
and enjoyed romantic partners who were
adventuresome risk-takers.
Finally, factor analysis revealed a five-factor
dimensional structure of the 24 character strengths
that was similar (but not identical) to the original
organization of strengths around the six virtues.
The five factors were identified as strengths relating
to restraint (e.g., humility, prudence, and
mercy), intelligence (e.g., creativity and curiosity),
relationships (e.g., love and kindness), emotions
(e.g., bravery, hope, and self-regulation), and
religion (e.g., spirituality and gratitude). Peterson
and Seligman acknowledge the tentative nature of
the organization of character strengths around the
six core virtues. Subsequent research will undoubtedly
refine the virtue categories and the strengths
that define them. For example, a recent study
examining the factor structure of 42 positive character
traits, including those from the VIA project,
found only a partial overlap with the VIA six-virtue
model (Haslam, Bain, & Neal, 2004). Results suggested
that categories of self-control, love, wisdom,
drive, and vivacity may better capture how people
think about and organize character strengths.
Whatever the final organization, the VIA project
has provided a useful starting point, by proposing
a detailed list of character strengths and strong evidence
for their universality across time and culture.
In the remainder of this chapter, we will
review research and theory related to the virtues of
wisdom and transcendence. Chapter 11 is focused
on the virtue of love. Literature relevant to other
strengths has been discussed in previous chapters as
described below. Peterson and Seligman (2004) provide
a comprehensive review of research and theory
relating to each character strength.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 213
WISDOM AS A FOUNDATIONAL
STRENGTH AND VIRTUE
From the ancient Greeks to the present, wisdom and
living a good life have been intimately connected.
Despite cultural differences in the specifics (e.g.,
Yang, 2001), wisdom is most generally understood to
mean a philosophic understanding of what matters in
life and the practical knowledge of how to conduct a
life that matters (Baltes & Freund, 2003b; Peterson &
Seligman, 2004; Robinson, 1990). Theoretical wisdom
and practical wisdom are thus wedded together and
assumed to produce a happy and satisfying life. The
happiness connected to wisdom has more to do with
the eudaimonic than with the hedonic perspective
(see Chapter 4). Wisdom involves identifying and pursuing
the deeper and enduring purposes of life,
beyond individual happiness. Wisdom is the ability to
balance your needs and happiness with those of others
(Sternberg, 1998). Wisdom serves the common
rather than the purely individual good by finding a
balance between the two. Many psychologists have
come to regard wisdom as a foundation for a life welllived
and one of humans’ most important strengths
(e.g., Baltes & Freund, 2003a, 2003b; Baltes, Gluck, &
Kunzman, 2002; Csikszentmihalyi & Rathunde, 1990;
Sternberg, 1990, 1998a).
What Is Wisdom?
One way to explore the meaning of wisdom is to
examine people’s everyday understanding. Each of
us has some implicit idea about wisdom, drawn
from cultural characterizations that are embodied in
exemplars of “wise” people. Think of famous people,
past and present, who exemplify your understanding
of a wise person. Who comes to mind? The
top 15 answers given by college students are shown
in Table 10.3. Interestingly, along with well-known
wise people like Gandhi, Confucius, Jesus Christ,
Martin Luther King, and Socrates, “wisdom nominees”
also included Oprah Winfrey and Ann Landers
(Paulus, Wehr, Harms, & Strasser, 2002).
This study also investigated whether people
distinguish among wisdom, intelligence, creativity,
and sheer fame by having different groups of participants
make nominations for each of the specified
characteristics. Table 10.3 shows that the nominations
for each of the categories include a blend of
historic and contemporary figures. Evidence of the
differences people perceive among wise, intelligent,
creative, and just famous people was shown by the
low degree of overlap in the various nominee lists.
Only one person, Oprah Winfrey, was on both the
wisdom list and the intelligence list. There was no
overlap between nominees for creativity and wisdom,
a 27% overlap between creative and intelligent
people, and a 7% overlap between wisdom and creativity.
People do not use pure fame or notoriety as a
basis for nominating wise, creative, or intelligent
people. Sheer fame nominees never exceeded 20%
of overlap with the other three categories.
To get at the specific factors that define folk
wisdom, researchers have asked people to identify
Strength Topic Chapter
Curiosity Five Factor Model (FFM) Chapter 9
Openness to experience
Love of Learning Approach/avoidance goals Chapter 7
Intrinsic/extrinsic motivation
Persistence Commitment Chapter 7
Persistence and self-esteem Chapter 9
Integrity Autonomy Chapters 2; 7
Self-determination theory
Prudence FFM—conscientiousness Chapter 9
Self-regulation Self-control and regulation Chapter 8
Hope Optimism/hope Chapter 9
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
214 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
TABLE 10.3 Nominations for intelligent, creative, wise, and famous people
Intelligent Creative Wise Sheer Fame
1. Einstein Da Vinci Gandhi Princess Diana
2. Bill Clinton Picasso Confucius Elvis Presley
3. Da Vinci Michelangelo Jesus Christ Michael Jordan
4. Prime Minister Mozart M. L. King Muhammad Ali
5. Gates Spielberg Socrates Michael Jackson
6. Shakespeare Shakespeare Mother Theresa Bill Clinton
7. Hawking Michael Jackson Solomon Madonna
8. Oprah Beethoven Buddha Wayne Gretzky
9. Newton Walt Disney Pope Bill Gates
10. Mozart Robin Williams Oprah Winfrey John F. Kennedy
11. Edison Salvador Dali Winston Churchill Nelson Mandela
12. Suzuki Madonna Dalai Lama Marilyn Monroe
13. Madonna Sigmund Freud Ann Landers Adolph Hitler
14. Gorbachev Alexander Graham Bell Nelson Mandela George Bush, Sr.
15. Trudeau Margaret Atwood Queen Elizabeth Jesus Christ
Source: Paulus, D. L., Wehr, P., Harms, P. D., & Strasser, D. H. (2002). Use of exemplars to reveal
implicit types of intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1051–1062. Copyright
American Psychological Association. Reprinted by permission.
wise behaviors and have analyzed the characteristics
of wisdom described in cultural, historical, and
philosophical writings. For example, Sternberg
(1985) asked a group of college professors and
lay-persons to list characteristics they associated
with wise people. Researchers then took the top
40 wisdom characteristics and asked college students
to sort them into piles, according to “which
behaviors [were] likely to be found together in a
person.” Based on students’ sortings, Sternberg
identified six groupings of attributes that characterize
a wise person:
1. Reasoning ability: Uncommon ability to look
at a problem and solve it through good logical
reasoning ability, by applying knowledge to
particular problems, by integrating information
and theories in new ways, and by possessing a
huge store of knowledge.
2. Sagacity: A keen understanding of human
nature, thoughtfulness, fairness, good listening
abilities, knowledge of self, and placing value
on the advice and knowledge of others.
3. Learning from ideas and the environment:
Places value on ideas, is perceptive, and learns
from others’ mistakes.
4. Judgment: Has good, sensible judgment at all
times, takes a long-term rather than a short-term
view, and thinks before acting and speaking.
5. Expeditious use of information: Learns
and retains information from experience (both
mistakes and successes), willingness to change
one’s mind based on new experience.
6. Perspicacity: Demonstrates perceptiveness,
intuition, ability to see through things, read
between the lines; and discern the truth and
the right thing to do.
In his analysis of wisdom in philosophical writings,
Baltes (1993) identified seven properties
describing the nature of wisdom (taken from Baltes &
Staudinger, 2000, Appendix A, p. 135).
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 215
1. “Wisdom addresses important and difficult
questions and strategies about the conduct and
meaning of life.”
2. “Wisdom includes knowledge about the limits
of knowledge and the uncertainties of the
world.”
3. “Wisdom represents a truly superior level of
knowledge, judgment, and advice.”
4. “Wisdom constitutes knowledge with extraordinary
scope, depth, measure, and balance.”
5. “Wisdom involves a perfect synergy of mind
and character, that is, an orchestration of
knowledge and virtues.”
6. “Wisdom represents knowledge used for the
good or well-being of oneself and that of
others.”
7. “Wisdom is easily recognized when manifested,
although difficult to achieve and specify.”
Wisdom, then, is not the same thing as technical
knowledge, “book learning,” fame, or intelligence
as measured by an IQ test. Having lots of
education, being a “smart” person, or being an
expert in a given area (like computer technology
or finance) does not by itself qualify a person
as wise. Many people are clever, intelligent, or
experts in their field, but far fewer are wise.
Wisdom embodies a particular kind of knowledge,
intelligence, and judgment focused on the conduct
of a virtuous life. Wise people have learned life’s
most important lessons. The broad scope of their
understanding includes the uncertainties of life—
that is, knowing what cannot be definitively
known. Two prominent theories attempt to capture
wisdom’s essential elements: Sternberg’s balance
theory and the work of Paul Baltes on wisdom as
expertise in the conduct of life (often referred to as
the Berlin wisdom model).
Theories of Wisdom
BALANCE THEORY Sternberg’s balance theory
describes the practical intelligence necessary to take
wise action when confronting difficult and complex
life situations (Sternberg, 1990, 1998a). Wisdom is
based on tacit knowledge that is built up over time
as people learn how to pursue and achieve valued
goals successfully. Tacit knowledge is the actionoriented
component of practical intelligence
(i.e., knowing “how” rather than know “what”).
Sternberg believes that knowledge of how to
live successfully is learned in the trenches of life
experience—not through formal education or direct
instruction from others. Tacit knowledge becomes
the foundation for wisdom when it is used to
achieve a common good rather than a self-interested
good, and when it is focused on finding ways to balance
the often conflicting interests and choices
involved in real-life situations.
According to Sternberg’s balance theory,
wise people are skillful in balancing three interests
and three possible courses of action in arriving at
solutions to life problems. The three interests are
(a) one’s own interests and needs (intrapersonal);
(b) the interests and needs of important others like
a spouse, friend, or employer (interpersonal); and
(c) those related to community, country, environment,
or religion (extrapersonal). Balancing these
multiple interests to achieve a common good
requires consideration of three courses of action
concerning whether and how much individuals
need to (a) change themselves (adaptation);
(b) change their environment, including others; or
(c) select a new environment altogether.
Consider the following example of a life
dilemma that confronts many “baby boomers,”
often referred to as the “sandwich generation”
because they are “sandwiched” between the needs
of their aging parents and their own children.
Imagine yourself in this situation. You and your
spouse both have successful, but demanding
careers. You have two children, one child is in college
and the other, a sophomore in high school,
will be off to college in two years. Retirement is
still a number of years off, in part because of the
need to pay your children’s college expenses.
Your aging parents are becoming increasingly frail.
They have several significant health issues and
cannot live by themselves much longer. Your parents
want to maintain their independence and do
not want to move into an assisted living facility or
nursing home. What would be a wise course of
action here?
To meet Sternberg’s criteria for wisdom, you
must find ways to balance your own interests and
those of your family with the increasing need for
support required by your parents’ deteriorating situation.
You must consider and find answers to questions
like the following: How much should your
own family have to sacrifice, and how much should
your parents have to sacrifice? How can you balance
all the interests in this case? In terms of specific
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
216 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
actions, the question becomes, whose environment
and life must change the most? Yours? Your family’s?
Your parents’? Should you adjust your life to your
parents’ needs and move closer to your parents?
Should they move in with you, or nearby? Should
you try to place them in an assisted living facility?
These are obviously hard choices! It’s not easy to
know what balance of interests and actions constitute
a wise solution. Wisdom does not lead to a perfect
balance of interests and actions, in the sense
that everyone will be happy and won’t have to
accommodate change or make sacrifices. Instead,
Sternberg’s idea is that wisdom means applying tacit
knowledge to find the best possible solution that
balances both multiple interests and possible actions
involving adaptation and change. A balance of interests
defines a common good, and balanced actions
serving a common good define wisdom.
WISDOM AS EXPERT KNOWLEDGE IN THE CONDUCT
OF LIFE Baltes and his colleagues at the Max Planck
Institute in Berlin, Germany, have developed a set of
specific criteria for defining and measuring wisdom
that provides the basis for an ongoing program of
empirical studies. In their Berlin wisdom model,
wisdom is defined as expert knowledge concerning
the “fundamental pragmatics of life” (Baltes, 1997;
Baltes & Smith, 1990, Baltes & Staudinger, 2000). The
phrase, “fundamental pragmatics of life” refers to
“. . . knowledge and judgment about the essence of
the human condition and the ways and means of
planning, managing, and understanding a good life”
(Baltes & Staudinger, 2000, p. 124). Wisdom is
assessed according to the following five criteria.
1. Factual knowledge: Extensive knowledge of
the pragmatics of life. Knowing the “whats” of
the human condition and human nature (e.g.,
differences among people, social relationships,
society, social norms, etc).
2. Procedural knowledge: Knowing “how.”
Strategies and approaches for solving life’s problems,
achieving goals, dealing with conflict, etc.
3. Lifespan contextualism: Knowledge of different
life settings and social environments (e.g.,
work, education, family, leisure, and friends),
and how these roles and settings change over
time, both for individuals and for society.
4. Relativism of values: Awareness of individual
and cultural differences in values and life priorities.
Wise people are committed to the common
good, so this does not mean “anything goes.”
Relativism means consideration and sensitivity
to value differences among people from different
backgrounds.
5. Awareness and management of uncertainty:
Recognizing the limits of knowledge. The
future cannot be fully known ahead of time. An
understanding of how to cope effectively with
the uncertainty of knowledge about the world.
Because wisdom is defined by superior knowledge
in the conduct of life, few people are expected
to meet all five of the wisdom criteria. Measures of
wisdom indicate people’s degree of wisdom-related
knowledge. Wisdom is assessed by presenting
research participants with challenging, hypothetical
life situations and dilemmas, and asking them to
describe aloud what should be considered and what
should be done in response to each dilemma.
Participant responses are tape-recorded and evaluated
by a panel of trained judges, who assess the
degree of correspondence between participants’
responses and the five wisdom criteria. The life
dilemmas include situations like the following two
examples (from Baltes & Staudinger, 2000, p. 126):
1. “Someone receives a phone call from a good
friend who says that he or she cannot go on
like this and has decided to commit suicide.
What might one/the person take into consideration
and do in such a situation?”
2. “In reflecting over their lives, people sometimes
realize that they have not achieved what
they had once planned to achieve. What
should they do and consider?”
Judges’ evaluations of respondents’ answers
show substantial inter-judge agreement; test–retest
reliability is also high. Sample excerpts from lowrated
and high-rated responses are given below
(Baltes & Staudinger, 2000, Appendix B, p. 136) for
the following life dilemma:
“A 15-year old girl wants to get married
right away.What should one/she consider
and do?”
Example of a Response Judges Rated as
Low-Wisdom:
“A 15-year old girl wants to get married?
No, no way, marrying at age 15 would be
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 217
utterly wrong. One has to tell the girl that
marriage is not possible. [After further
probing] It would be irresponsible to support
such an idea.No, this is just crazy.”
Example of a Response Judges Rated as
High-Wisdom:
“Well, on the surface, this seems like an
easy problem. On average, marriage for a
15-year old girl is not a good thing. But
there are situations where the average case
does not fit. Perhaps in this instance, special
life circumstances are involved, such
that the girl has a terminal illness. Or the
girl has just lost her parents. And also, this
girl may live in another culture or historical
period. Perhaps she was raised with a
value system different from ours. In addition,
one also has to think about adequate
ways of talking with the girl and to consider
her emotional state.”
Using the life dilemmas measure, Baltes and
his colleagues have provided some interesting
answers to wisdom-related questions (see Baltes &
Staudinger, 2000; Baltes et al., 2002; Kramer, 2000;
Kunzmann & Baltes, 2003, for research summaries).
Does Wisdom Increase with Age? Conventional
wisdom about wisdom suggests that we become
wiser as we age and accumulate more life experiences.
Studies provide only partial support for this
belief. Wisdom has been found to increase dramatically
during adolescence and young adulthood; it
then appears to remain relatively stable until age 75,
when it begins to decline. Getting older, by itself,
does not enhance wisdom. However, examination of
the top 20% of wise people showed that a higher
proportion of the “very wise” were middle-aged
(Baltes & Staudinger, 2000).
Are “Experts” Wiser than Non-Experts?
Clinical psychologists have extensive experience
in helping people review, plan, and manage their
lives. They also might be expected to develop an
understanding of the dilemmas of life through
their clinical training and work as psychotherapists.
Are they wiser than comparably educated
individuals whose careers are not focused on
life dilemmas? Several studies (see Baltes &
Staudinger, 2000) found that clinical psychologists
did show higher wisdom scores than a control
group of non-psychologist professionals—a finding
that pleased the second author of your text,
who is a practicing clinical psychologist. However,
several considerations may qualify this finding
(sorry, Marie!). First, clinical psychologists did
score significantly higher than members of the
control group on the wisdom measure, but their
scores did not approach the top end of the scale.
(Specifically, the scale ran from 1 to 7, with 7
reflecting a high level of wisdom. Clinical psychologists
scored an average of 3.8, just above the
scale’s midpoint.) Second, it is entirely possible
that individuals with a propensity toward wisdom
self-select into clinical psychology careers. In line
with this possibility, professional specialization
accounted for more variation in wisdom scores
than did intelligence and personality factors.
Third, Baltes wondered whether the superior
performance of clinical psychologists might reflect
a professional bias imbedded in the measure
of wisdom. That is, since the test-maker and the
test-takers are both psychologists, do clinical psychologists
have an edge over non-psychologists
because they think more like the test developers
than other respondents? To find out, researchers
compared the performance of clinical psychologists
to a sample of individuals nominated as wise
by an independent panel of non-psychologists.
Wisdom nominees were found to perform just
as well as the clinical psychologists, suggesting
that the measure of wisdom is not biased against
non-psychologists.
Are Wise People Happier? Given the connection
of wisdom to a good life, one might think the answer
would be yes. However, wisdom is connected to
deeper meanings and dilemmas of life that go
beyond the simple pursuit of happiness. Wisdom is
not guided by the “pleasure principle” (Kunzmann &
Baltes, 2003). It is possible that wisdom might even
reduce personal happiness. If breadth of factual
knowledge and complex understandings lead to
greater awareness of pain and suffering in the world
and the uncertainties of life, perhaps wisdom comes
with an emotional price tag. Perhaps ignorance
really is bliss. Another possibility is that wise people
may excel at coming to terms with the emotional ups
and downs of life. Their expertise in living a good
life may include more peace of mind and less
extreme mood swings.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
218 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
To evaluate these questions, Kunzmann and
Baltes (2003) examined the relationship of wisdom
to affective experience in a sample including
young adults (15–20 years), middle-aged adults
(30–40 years), and older adults (60–70 years).
Higher wisdom scores were associated with less
frequent experiencing of negative affects (such
as anger, sadness, fear, disappointment, shame,
and indifference), less frequent experiencing of
pleasure-oriented, positive affects (such as happiness,
cheerfulness, amusement, exuberance, and
pride), but more frequent experiencing of feelings
related to affective involvement with the environment
(such as feelings of interest, alertness, inspiration,
attentiveness, and active engagement).
Kunzmann and Baltes argue that these results support
the connection of wisdom to emotional regulation.
Wise people, perhaps because of their “big
picture view” and skill in self-control, are less
reactive to life events, whether positive or negative.
In addition, wise people are not oriented
toward pursuing pleasure or avoiding pain.
Instead, they are energized by emotions that
enhance active involvement and learning. Wise
people are motivated to explore and understand
the complexities and paradoxes of life. It makes
sense that wisdom would be associated with more
frequent experience of emotions that motivate and
result from active engagement with the world
(e.g., inspiration, interest, and attentiveness).
Wisdom in Action: The (SOC) Model
of Effective Life Management
Baltes and his colleagues have recently begun to
describe a wisdom-based framework for identifying
the essential features of a good life (Baltes &
Freund, 2003a, 2003b; Baltes & Staudinger, 2000;
Freund & Baltes, 2002; Kramer, 2000; Kunzmann,
2004). Wisdom, as defined in Baltes and colleagues’
earlier work, involved an understanding of
both the deeper purposes and meanings of a good
life (what) and an understanding of the means by
which a good life could be achieved (how). The
Berlin wisdom model was initially directed more at
knowledge-related wisdom than at wisdom-related
action. Recent work has shifted to include a more
specific model of action that describes how
theoretical wisdom about what matters in life may
direct practical wisdom concerning how to live a
life that matters. Practical wisdom is described by
their SOC Model of Effective Life Management
(SOC refers to “select, optimize, and compensate”).
The model describes the role of wisdom in effective
life management and optimal human functioning
(see Figure 10.1).
Optimal
Human
Development
Wisdom
Defining the Meta-range
of
Desirable Goals,
Desirable Means
SOC
Effective Life Management and
Goal Pursuit: Orchestration of
Selection,
Optimization, and
Compensation
FIGURE 10.1 The SOC Model of Effective Life Management
Source: Baltes, P. B., & Freund, A. M. (2003b). The intermarriage
of wisdom and selective optimization with compensation: Two
meta-heuristics guiding the conduct of life. In C. L. M. Keyes
& J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life
well-lived (pp. 249–273). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association. Copyright American Psychological Association.
Reprinted by permission.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 219
The SOC model does not specify details concerning
management of a successful life. The
specifics are dependent on each individual’s needs,
values, personality, resources, stage of life, and
environmental context. The SOC specifies three general
strategies, applicable across the life span, for
how to achieve personally important goals. In many
ways, the selection, optimization, and compensation
model describes an approach to life planning that
serves to organize the major research findings concerning
personal goals and the self-regulation
processes necessary to achieve them (discussed in
Chapters 7 and 8). Baltes and his colleagues make
the connection between goal research and SOC
explicit in their recent work (e.g., Baltes & Freund,
2003a, 2003b).
SELECTION Selection is the first step in life planning
and is an integral part of personal development and
well-being. Choosing appropriate goals among a
variety of options contributes to a purposeful, meaningful,
and organized life. While the definition of
“appropriate” depends on a person’s resources and
life circumstances, goal research provides some
guidance in distinguishing between goals that
enhance and goals that detract from well-being.
Approach goals that are personally expressive,
related to intrinsic needs, and freely chosen are
likely to inspire strong commitment, successful
achievement, and increased well-being and life
satisfaction.
OPTIMIZATION Optimization refers to all the choices
and actions that lead to successful goal achievement.
Optimization overlaps with many of the
processes described in Chapter 8. Goal achievement
involves self-regulation, monitoring of progress,
belief in personal control and competence, and ability
to delay short-term gratification in the service of
pursuing long-term goals. The optimization element
also includes the importance of repeated practice
and effort in developing skills necessary for goal
attainment.
COMPENSATION Compensation refers to developing
alternative means for achieving and maintaining
goals when previously effective means are blocked.
Compensation strategies might involve finding new
means and resources, activating unused resources,
or relying on others for help and support. A student
who loses a lucrative summer job that pays half of
her yearly college expenses might take out a student
loan, dip further into her savings, or ask her parents
for more financial help to compensate for the drop
in financial resources.
In an empirical test of the SOC model, Freund
and Baltes (2002) developed a self-report questionnaire
to assess people’s endorsement of SOC. Wellbeing,
personality, and cognitive style were also
assessed. Study participants ranged in age from 14
to 89 years. Items measuring selection focused on
the clarity, importance, and prioritizing of personal
goals, and on the degree of goal commitment.
Optimization items asked about expenditure of
effort, goal planning, and modeling one’s behavior
after the strategies used by successful others.
Compensation was measured by statements concerning
efforts to find other means of goal achievement,
renewed effort and commitment, and seeking
help from others when initial paths to goal achievement
were blocked.
Two of the study’s noteworthy findings related
SOC to age and well-being. Consistent with the pattern
of findings from wisdom research, endorsement
of SOC strategies increased with age from young to
middle age and then showed a decrease in late
adulthood. Middle age appears to be the peak
period of refined skill in using SOC behaviors for
effective life management. Each component of the
SOC model was significantly related to Ryff’s six-part
measure of psychological well-being (see Chapter 2).
This measure is based on the eudaimonic conception
of well-being, and evaluates a person’s degree
of self-acceptance, personal growth, sense of purpose,
environmental mastery, autonomy, and positive
relationship with others. Freund and Baltes also
found a strong positive relationship between SOC
strategies and higher levels of positive emotions.
The SOC model appears to be an informative framework
for thinking about the determinants of wellbeing
across the life span (see Baltes & Freund,
2003b, for a review of other SOC confirming studies).
The SOC model specifies the general skills necessary
to achieve personal goals and compensate for
setbacks, and recognizes the importance of goals in
relation to well-being. The SOC model both draws
from and affirms the major findings of goal research
described in Chapters 7 and 8.
You may have noticed that the SOC model does
not specify what goals a person should choose to
pursue. Rather, it focuses only on means. As Baltes
and Freund note, “Criminals and Mafia bosses . . . can
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
220 Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character
be masters of SOC” (2003a, p. 30). In other words,
the model does not address questions about what
goals are good or virtuous, or what means for goal
achievement are acceptable and desirable from
an ethical or a moral point of view. Baltes and his
colleagues argue that it is the role of wisdom to determine
what goals and what means are the most important
and morally desirable. “Wisdom provides a
selector concerning which goals and means are
of fundamental significance in the life course and,
in addition, are ethically and morally desirable”
(Baltes & Freund, 2003a, p. 34). In other words,
because of the breadth and depth of their understanding
of life and virtue, wise people would be
expected to devote themselves to personally meaningful
goals that contribute both to their own good
and to the common good.
In summary, a good life, from the perspective
of wisdom in action, may be described as infusing
effective life management strategies with the knowledge
and virtue of wisdom. In the words of Baltes
and Freund (2003a, p. 33), “. . . we propose that
wisdom, the knowledge of the fundamental pragmatics
of life, be viewed as a desirable end state
of human development that can be lived and
implemented through selective optimization with
compensation.”
Focus on Theory: Wisdom
or Self-Control as Master Virtues?
It is easy to think of wisdom as a master virtue. The
development of wisdom would seem to include a
concomitant development of other virtuous behaviors
such as compassion, kindness, humility, fairness,
and prudence. In fact, we think of wise people
as wise, largely because they embody multiple
virtues. It is somewhat harder to think of a single
other virtue that has this foundational quality.
However, Baumeister and Exline (1999) argue that
self-control might also be a candidate for master
virtue status. They describe self-control as the
“moral muscle” behind many virtuous behaviors.
Their thesis is built on a number of interrelated and
empirically-grounded arguments (see Chapter 8 for
a review of self-control research).
Baumeister and Exline are among an increasing
number of psychologists who believe that explorations
of morality and virtue have been neglected by
psychologists. Virtue and morality are highly important
personal qualities that may be more defining of
an individual’s identity than the traits studied by personality
psychologists. For example, they note that
people regard moral traits such as honesty, trustworthiness,
and fidelity, as among the most desirable
qualities for a potential spouse.
One important function of morality and virtue
is to facilitate the development and maintenance of
harmonious relationships, which are critically
important to the well-being of individuals and society.
Major research reviews conclude that the need
to belong is one of the most fundamental human
motives, the fulfillment of which is a foundation for
well-being (e.g., Baumeister & Leary, 1995). A major
impediment to relationship harmony occurs when
people pursue self-interested needs at the expense
of their relationships. This might involve relations
between individuals, or between individuals and the
broader society. The crucial role of morality within
cultures, and virtue within individuals, is to control
selfish interests for the sake of the greater common
good. Much of what we regard as virtuous behavior
and much of what we know about successful relationships
involves putting needs of others ahead of
your own. Restraining self-interest means exerting
self-control. Baumeister and Exline believe that selfcontrol
is the psychological foundation for most
virtues and that the opposite of virtue, namely sin
and vice, result from failed self-control.
As Baumeister and Exline note, self-control
failure seems clearly involved in the Seven Deadly
Sins described in Christian theology: gluttony,
sloth, greed, lust, envy, anger, and pride. Each of
these sins and vices exemplifies one or another
form of failed control: gluttony by self-indulgence
and excessive pursuit of pleasure; sloth or laziness
by failed initiative and self-motivation; greed, lust,
and envy by selfish and exploitive dealings with
others centered on gratifying only individual
needs; anger by lack of emotional restraint and
impulse control; and pride by self-aggrandizement
at the expense of others.
The relation of sin to failed self-control finds a
counterpart in the connection between virtue and
the exertion of self-control. For example, prudence
refers to reasoned action guided by consideration of
long-term implications rather than immediate needs
or opportunities. Delay of gratification and staying
on course with a long-term goal in mind are central
features of self-control and self-regulation. Similarly,
justice requires control of self-interest in upholding
standards of conduct aimed at the common good.
ISBN 1-256-51557-4
Positive Psychology, by Steve R. Baumgardner and Marie K. Crothers. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 10 • Virtue and Strengths of Character 221
The virtue of temperance (which refers to exercising
emotional restraint and avoiding excesses) also
clearly requires self-control.
In addition to its links with specific virtues,
self-control and self-regulation also help explain
how virtue may guide behavior. Recall from
Chapter 8 that self-regulation involves monitoring
and changing behavior in relationship to a standard.
Applied to personal goals this means establishing
a goal, monitoring progress, and altering
actions and the self over time to achieve a goal.
Baumeister and Exline argue that virtue’s role in
behavior fits this same general pattern. Most of us
aspire to be morally responsible people. Each of us
has moral standards that can be used to monitor
our ongoing behavior. If we maintain some level of
self-awareness, we know the extent to which our
actions are consistent or inconsistent with our standards.
Feelings of guilt are clear signals of inconsistency.
Self-control is required in order to conform
to our own standards, rather than giving in to temptations
or momentary emotional impulses. It is this
self-control that keeps behavior in line with moral
standards that Baumeister and Exline believe is the
“moral muscle” underlying virtue; thus, virtue is
dependent on self-control. “Vice signifies failure of
self-control, whereas virtue involves the consistent,
disciplined exercise of self control. Self-control can
fairly be regarded as the master virtue” (Baumeister
& Exline, 1999, p. 1189).
TRANSCENDENCE: RELIGION
AND SPIRITUALITY
The Search for Meaning
Viktor Frankl (1976/1959) was an early psychiatrist