I would say that is a false statement. A prudent man does not limit his obligation to his fellow man to only those motivatied by absolute necessity or those inherent under the threat of law. A prudent man would place a value on free will, community, and fellowship and therefore recognize his obligation to go beyond only the established legal imperitives in support of that value.As Aristotle and many others have continued to point out, human beings are political animals; we are social beings. Nature teaches us that human babies do not survive by themselves; human adults are necessary for the survival of the young; the family is natural to man as is some sort of ordered society. In this sense, all of us in society are concerned and and as prudent men, therefore obligated to develop the potential of our young–not for selfish egoistic purposes but for the contributions each may make to the whole society when individual talent is nurtured and developed. So the need to accomplish and progress is not restricted to my inner need to satisfy my own ego, but rather it is cast in a social context where my purpose and, my accomplishment contributes to the society as a whole. The give and take and the social implications of this process are so varied that they will not conform to a term such as “categorical imperative.”