This quote suggests that moderation is only seen as a virtue, or a positive quality, in individuals who are believed to have other options. In essence, it’s the idea that restraint is only admirable when one has the power or ability to indulge but chooses not to. This outlook implies that moderation isn’t particularly virtuous if it’s the only option available due to circumstances such as poverty or lack of access.
Applying this idea in today’s world, we can look at it through various lenses such as consumerism, environmental conservation and personal growth.
In terms of consumerism and material wealth,someone who lives modestly despite having substantial wealth might potentially be seen as virtuous as they choose not to excessively spend or flaunt their riches. On the other hand, someone living modestly because they have no other choice might not be praised for this same behavior.
When thinking about environmental conservation,an individual who consciously reduces their carbon footprint despite having means for more consumption is often admired. They could travel frequently by plane but choose trains; they could buy new clothes regularly but opt for second-hand items – these are examples of moderation stemming from choice rather than necessity.
On a personal development front – consider self-discipline and restraint in our habits and behaviors. Someone with access to unhealthy food choices choosing a balanced diet; an individual with plenty of leisure time opting for regular exercise over constant relaxation – these actions reflect virtue in moderation as ther are alternatives readily available but consciously ignored.
Thus this quote encourages us to recognize genuine virtue where people could easily opt for excesses yet deliberately decide on moderate actions. It calls us out on our judgments too – highlighting how we might wrongly assign ‘virtue’ based purely on visible outcomes without understanding underlying circumstances fully.
