What wisdom is.
A new egg is discovered. No stable theory can be created proving that it will hatch into a creature, but reasonably a philosopher might propose that it will. What is the weight of his/her proposition?
The philosopher's grounds might be given that we have experienced numerous egg-forms, it is probable this new egg contains a growing creature.
The proposal is fair, we can associate X (new egg-form) with Y (old egg-form).
Although the theory of Z is unstable, we don't necessarily need it to be stable to have understood X, for our wisdom suffices.
The oddness here is not as strict as the lotto; it seems that something can be taken from Z's instability.
Based on the previous statements, I conclude with this list of questions:
1. Is unstable Z understandable?
2. Through the association between X and Y is Z proven?
3. Is thought hypothetical or theoretical, neither, or both?
4. What is thought?
The philosopher's grounds might be given that we have experienced numerous egg-forms, it is probable this new egg contains a growing creature.
The proposal is fair, we can associate X (new egg-form) with Y (old egg-form).
Although the theory of Z is unstable, we don't necessarily need it to be stable to have understood X, for our wisdom suffices.
The oddness here is not as strict as the lotto; it seems that something can be taken from Z's instability.
Based on the previous statements, I conclude with this list of questions:
1. Is unstable Z understandable?
2. Through the association between X and Y is Z proven?
3. Is thought hypothetical or theoretical, neither, or both?
4. What is thought?
Comments (3)
A.) That it is in fact an egg (as definition dictates and not simply something that appears as one say a Fabergé egg or unusually shaped hollow rock)
B.) That it is not old, preserved, or otherwise now (or perhaps has been) placed in new and possibly unsuitable conditions for its respective biological hatching process
Z has yet to be explicitly defined though a reader can infer this is the idea that a creature either will or will not be hatched?
1.) Sure. Not all eggs follow the respective biological hatching process for a multitude of reasons.
2.) Considering all variables are in either constant or continual reference to current or potential states of a single object, both actual and hypothetical, I suppose?
3.) Thought, in general? People have written entire books on this so. I want to say, both? I think, lol.
4.) What isn't thought? Mayhaps.. thought is an observation or statement, or series of observations or statements one believes is unheard and is made under the assumption it will not be responded to?
Philosophy is akin to wisdom. In philosophy we can make an association between X and Y, and formulate Z using our intelligence (knowledge associated with the subject; i.e. intel).
Z may be unstable but if we want to make it stable it would be a jump from pure-philo to science.
Philosophy is based on reason and logic. Therefore we can debate on all the topics in critical way in philosophical discussion.
In Religion and Mysticism, we cannot debate the topics as we do in Philosophy in critical way. The distinction is clear, and understanding that difference, to me is wisdom.
"Mysticism is entirely emotional, entirely made up of subtle, incommunicable sensations, which are even more incapable of verbal expression and logical definition than are such things as sound and color and line." -pp. 19 Esotericism and Modern Thought by P.D. Ouspensky