How Do We Measure Wisdom, or is it Easier To Talk About Foolishness?
I am asking this question because I am aware of so many conflicting philosophies and questions arising from them. I admit that I am feeling a bit irritated by so many debates in philosophy, arising from theories of so many different, but competing kinds. But, I do believe that some believe that they have the truth, and others are ignorant. I don't believe that it is that it is that simple at all, but please forgive my question if it appears to be completely ridiculous.
However, I think that the whole basis of evaluation of knowledge and its application to life, is complex but far from straightforward. My own understanding of the problem is based on pursuit of philosophy as sophia, as being the idea of the wisdom. What is wisdom is a complex area, and the means of achieving it even more complicated, which is why I am asking for how we can possibly measure it. I am certainly aware of my own limitations, even though I see wisdom as an ideal to be achieved, or realised.
Edit: As it became apparent that it is so hard to pinpoint wisdom, I decided to expand the topic to include foolishness, because there is probably more to discuss.
However, I think that the whole basis of evaluation of knowledge and its application to life, is complex but far from straightforward. My own understanding of the problem is based on pursuit of philosophy as sophia, as being the idea of the wisdom. What is wisdom is a complex area, and the means of achieving it even more complicated, which is why I am asking for how we can possibly measure it. I am certainly aware of my own limitations, even though I see wisdom as an ideal to be achieved, or realised.
Edit: As it became apparent that it is so hard to pinpoint wisdom, I decided to expand the topic to include foolishness, because there is probably more to discuss.
Comments (67)
Quoting Jack Cummins
Good question. Is it really that difficult? One's own life/living is the best measurement. One's thoughts-feelings, words, and actions are the most reliable feedback. So is conduct. All of these are real time indicators. All these measurements are strongly based on solid realty, not theories. The degree of translation into actual living is the measurement.
I only wish that it was as simple as that, because my own experience is of being told that I am wrong, independently of what I think. It often leads me to think that I am best to keep all my ideas to myself. However, while I am aware of the subjectivity of the quest, I do believe that so many other people are too. I think that the ideas of wisdom may be vague at times, so I am not sure of my thread question in some ways, but , at the same time, believe that many are in the pursuit of wisdom, or as the Greeks named it, Sophia. I am raising it, for anyone who believes that it worth discussing.
Thanks, I definitely believe that we can learn from mistakes, even if we are not considered as elderly. My own view is that the experiences of making mistakes allows for humility, and ways of seeking better alternatives in many ways.
Your question was how do we measure wisdom. It was said, one can measure by looking at the feedback within oneself. The feedback of one's thoughts-feelings, words, and actions. To measure by one's conduct. All of which are real time feedback based on our reality, therefore not theoretical. To see if one is walking the talk.
Unless your question was how to measure the wisdom of others...
I think that your response is interesting because the question of feedback raises the question of how is wisdom constructed socially. I believe that is part of the issue, but so believe that wisdom is likely to go beyond social definitions. This may be part of the problem, being confronted with social and cultural definitions, while the experience may transcend these. It may be an issue of seeing beyond the ideas of convention, and trying to find a basis of knowledge, which is not simply about seeing experience in the ways we are accustomed to, and looking for deeper meaning.
I think the original meaning of "wise" - at least in a Greek context - was to be knowledgeable and skillful in practical matters. It later acquired the meaning of being wise like the Gods or God. Hence the term "philosopher" came to mean one who loved or desired wisdom and aimed to become wise like God as far as humanly possible.
Becoming wise probably starts with the realization of the limitations of your own knowledge, after which the more knowledge, especially of the practical kind, you acquire, the "wiser" you become.
Carry on.
That is interesting, and I probably began this discussion because I was thinking that in the current climate of our times, some people regard themselves as being more advanced in 'expert' knowledge rather than others.I believe that being aware of limitations is so much better than arrogance of thinking how we know so much.
I believe that wisdom is related to experiential knowledge, and goes beyond theory. I am not sure if my thread question will be considered worthy of philosophical debate, but my phone battery is likely to run out at any moment. But, if my thread question lasts at all, I will continue the discussion.
Learning from one's mistakes, knowing one's limitations, understanding motivation, knowing what one doesn't know (and having an inkling as to what one won't know in the future), wide-ranging "common sense" all takes time to accumulate, and some people accumulate it a lot faster than others. As a consequence, there are "wise" 35 year olds and 70 year old idiots.
Wisdom is a word I almost never use. It's just too vague, subjective.
We? Is this the objectification you are embarking on? The wisdom of the crowd?
The average of all gurus?
Measure wisdom by the questions it asks.
:smile:
Quoting skyblack
...it it was, the first post/suggestion will still hold true.
It requires wisdom to understand wisdom: the music is nothing if the audience is deaf. Walter Lippmann
I suspect that experience is often mistaken for wisdom.
Bingo. I was going to say wisdom is measured by the probative nature of questions asked. I was going to add something about silence, and brevity, too. But I think those come close upon the heels of a probative question.
Answers are a chimera.
Right. Experience isn't wisdom.
Nice quote, and true. The same sentiment has been echoed by many,
Quoting James Riley
This seems to me spot on. Wisdom is as much about not doing or saying, and what one does with a lack of knowledge/experience.
Brevity is seductive.
It is, but I think if one spends time in serious consideration about exactly how a question should be formulated, and presented, it ends up being brief.
I think journalists, especially, should spend more time so that when a question is asked, it is harder for a skilled politician to dodge, and even if he/she does, it is more apparent to the listener what was being asked and what was not being answered. Brevity can aid in this effort. I'd love to see the most intelligent people in an institution sitting around and strategizing this, getting beyond the "gotcha" BS and looking for enlightenment.
But beyond that, I recall the Socratic dialogues and the questioning, often with sincere curiosity. They were often pointed and brief, and enlightening. I see a measure wisdom in that.
I agree, I'm just pointing out that brevity is a grammatical skill that can be learned; I would say it's a sign of intelligence, but not wisdom. But the wise are often brief. Brevity is seductive because it suggests wisdom, regardless of whether there is wisdom behind the brief statement.
I did pause at ‘brevity’ - I don’t think it’s a measure of wisdom in itself, but I do agree that along with ‘probative’ it’s a necessary quality of the question, as is the silence surrounding it.
Agreed, that is why I said: "I was going to add something about silence, and brevity, too. But I think those come close upon the heels of a probative question."
Tough question. Personally I don't think thinking about who is wise has been particularly helpful in my personal experience. I suppose there may have been a time in which I'd try to look for people who have this elusive quality. The most I ever got of talking to people who are considered wise is a certain genuine humility. That I liked.
But much beyond that, it's just so easy to confuse wisdom with dubious and obscure ideologies that I don't like, nor do I think are good in general.
But each persons experience is unique.
I agree that while we use the word wisdom, it is extremely difficult to quantify. I am not even sure that knowledge, experience and expertise are that easy to quantify either really.
It is interesting that wisdom may not need 'knowledge/ experience.'
The question of potential silence and brevity is certainly worth thinking about. It also leads me to think that it may be that this thread will be extremely brief, because it may be that wisdom is extremely difficult to pinpoint, or even talk about.
Perhaps for 'us fools...it is a direction'
I am sure that it is not even important to ask 'who is wise'. I believe that we would be rather shocked if any person actually claimed to be wise'.
Yeah I tend to agree. Which makes the whole thing problematic, if no wise person will ever say they are wise, then what are we even talking about?
Yes, it is a bit of a shame that wisdom is so hard to point to. When I was thinking about finding wisdom yesterday I was hoping that it would open up some interesting dialogue of ideas, like many other terms spoken of within philosophy. However, when I read through the various responses this morning I realised how vague the idea is and how difficult it is to really try to spell out the idea in any depth.
But, I would imagine that it would be possible to name people who stood out in history, like Socrates, or the Buddha, but that is because they are in the distant past, and we know that they are such respected teachers. I also think that it would probably be possible to point to specific books as containing wisdom, because that makes it possible to see the teachings rather than focusing on a particular person.
The case with Socrates is illuminating, he denied he was the wisest man in Athens, maintaining that all he knew was that he knew nothing.
Obviously it's hard to accept the conclusion that Socrates knew nothing, but if he says he is not wise, then there's a problem with the concept. Perhaps we need to think about wisdom differently and instead of attributing to a person, we say that a person acted wisely or said something wise, while not saying that the person is wise.
As for Buddha yes, he would fit what comes to mind when one things of wisdom, but I don't know what he would've said about the topic, as I know almost nothing on the topic. So whatever wisdom is, almost no one will say that they are wise, even if people attribute wisdom to them.
If Socrates was not wise, perhaps there is not much hope for anyone really. But, I am quite happy to live with my own folly. I also believe that is much easier to speak about because it can include repeated mistakes and failure to learn from mistakes, excesses, sloth and so many vices. In fact, we could talk in so many depth about our foolishness. I am a bit tempted to update my title to include foolishness.
Quoting 180 Proof
:up:
Or attempting to give structure to our stupidity= it's not that wisdom grows, it's that one's ignorance is more clearly seen the more you discover things. :cool:
I have a quote from William Blake:
'The fool who persists in his folly will become wise.'
That is a bit reassuring, giving the idea that we don't even have to even try and give up being foolish. I do often feel that I have learned more from stupid mistakes, and I make plenty of mistakes often...
I think that the hardest part is about not beating yourself up about stupid, foolish mistakes. I know that when I have done or said things which I come to regret I spend so much time feeling so irritated with myself. Or, the other alternative is to blame others. But, it is all about unlearning behaviour patterns and reflection upon experience. I am sure that cognitive behavioral therapy helps. But, I think that, in general, we live in a culture which does not encourage that much reflection.
Indeed.
I don't think that it is necessary to abandon the idea of wisdom, but just about recognizing how hard it is to achieve, and what it is exactly is difficult to define. But, in many ways, it is a rather abstract, and more of a goal, a bit like the idea of perfection. It could even be that trying for such ideals is a recipe for failure. But, I do think it is hard to know what to aim for in standards, and this can be too low or too high. I think that it is probably about being aware of our own limitations.
Imagine Sisyphus happy indeed! :fire:
What is often not appreciated is that Socrates' knowledge of his ignorance was not simply a matter of knowing that he was ignorant.
Cross-thread points: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/548771
I agree. In your view would it be possible for a person to be wise without engaging with philosophy?
For example, A (an individual) is generally more wise than B (another individual) if they rank higher on the checklist below, and vice versa with foolishness as the opposite.
I invite everyone to help generate said checklist,
Checklist:
Learns from ones experiences/ doesn't repeat the same actions that lead to undesirable consequences more than once.
When discussing something, displays both a knowledge base and experiential lessons.
Through character/personality displays humility, patience, when discussing something with others but at the same time does not sacrifice explanation for brevity.
Is always questioning?
Runs 'new ideas/thoughts/concepts' through ones own personal philosophy of beliefs before commenting.
Never complacent when it comes to learning.
(These are just examples from some of the comments above, please feel free to add or modify, I'm curious what we could collectively come up with.)
Glad to be part of the discussion.
-Wisdom
noun
1. the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgement; the quality of being wise.
"listen to his words of wisdom"
-Good
noun
1. that which is morally right; righteousness.
"a mysterious balance of good and evil"
2. benefit or advantage to someone or something.
"he convinces his father to use his genius for the good of mankind"
-Foolish
adj
lacking good sense or judgement; unwise.
"he was foolish enough to confide in her"
When fundamentally and unbiasedly approached the word "Good" is biased towards an observer, the act of something done towards an observer be it morally right, advantageous or a benefit.
But the word has no consideration to the individual producing the act itself because it may not be "Good" or moral for them which can lead to fault ethically.
So wisdom itself is biased in concept with no regard of anothers ethics or truth as the mentioned "knowledge" or "experience" can be prone to misinterpretation or false/assumed knowledge.
Maybe it is better to measure a person's way of thought by how well they understand fault, like biases, assumptions, misinformation and fallacies.
Some parameters that correlate with "wisdom" that seem quantifiable. Taking a page out of the Delphic Oracle,
1. Temes Nosce (Know Thyself): Is a person, say, aware of his own weaknesses and strenghts? That would be a start.
2. Nothing to excess: Is the person mentally balanced? Does he take care of himself physically? Weight? Addictions? Illnesses (mental/physical)?
[b]3. Surety brings ruin: How certain is a person of his beliefs? This particular trait, uncertainty, is a trademark of sages I'm told. Easily measurable.
Thanks for your reply. I think that the idea of listing qualities is a good one. However, I would be a bit wary of running it as checklist to apply to individuals, because that would seem a bit like a person specification in job applications. Also, it could end up being a bit judgemental because it may be that wisdom is within.
However, I do agree that listing qualities related to wisdom itself is worthwhile. One quality which I believe is a non judgemental attitude towards others people.
Thanks for your reply. Bearing in mind that I added discussion of the foolish to the title, I wlcome you as the VIP of the thread, as I think that you probably put thought into your username.
What I think that your response draws attention to is the idea of balance and avoidance of excess. You also are pointing to health and wellbeing. I think that this is extremely important because if we are not well physically and mentally it is hard to function personally or for the greater good. It is not always that easy to keep healthy, especially if we have too much stress.
Even with physical health, some people follow the healthiest regimes and still get sick. I admit that I don't spend much time in food preparation, but try to look for items which don't have too many bad ingredients in them. But, ideas about what we need to eat and drink change, and I maintain that I need my 5 a day cups of coffee, but some people tell me that is too much.
Hi Jack I have some thoughts on wisdom. I guess I’m a little late to the party though haha.
Some observations: though many people become wiser with age you can be just as naive at 80 as you were at 20 and also some young people tend to have a surprising level of wisdom early on as the adage “old head on young shoulders” would suggest.
So it seems wisdom isn’t inherently restricted to experience. There must then be some form of logic , disposition or knowledge which if mastered correctly would enable one to be wise about issues and topics that have never affected them personally.
My understanding of wisdom is that it is the acknowledgment of that portion of knowledge which stays consistent between seemingly unrelated topics/ subjects. That is to say can be applied correctly to any case based on the fact that it is somehow more intrinsic than the differing superficial knowledge of disciplines.
Some examples:
“Buy when people are afraid/ uncertain and sell when they are confident/certain” - a cardinal slice of economic wisdom about the psychology of the global market. No matter how specific and complex you get in the nitty- gritty those who are successful never forget this big picture.
Others like “the more popular you become the more enemies you make” - because of jealousy, “if it seems to good to be true it is” - deceit. “Don’t count your eggs before they hatch” or “people will offer you an umbrella when the sun shines and demand it back when it rains”
All of these are simple truth pertaining to human behaviour. And while simple they are true and therefore consistently applicable. That’s the difference between the wise and the naive, wise people constantly apply basic rules rather then bank on the hope that maybe this time/ I myself may be an exception (naivety).
:up: ... to which I'd add that cultivating (some) of the following from various traditions (paths): https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/501801 ... sub specie durationis (pace Spinoza).
Good catch, thank you for the input. Yes, I do think there are qualities that perhaps lead to/allow for growth of wisdom, but you're most likely right, wisdom could be subjective to the individual. Quantifying it would maybe be finding a general balance between the two.
Thanks for your detailed reply. I think that the important question is to what extent is wisdom connected to ethics? I think that part of this relates to inner experience of the issues of morality and how this is related to the wider ones relating to the social dimensions. Part of seems to come down to mastery of self, but this is also connected to the others. We are individuals, but also social beings, so I believe that this is a difficult but interesting area. We can ask about personal wisdom, but we are in relationships with others, so it may be that we need to think about wisdom beyond the personal, as being bound up with social and cultural aspects of human life.
Thanks for your reply, and I hope that you are not late to the party, and that it is not over, just yet. I see the main issue which you raise as being about social rules and convention. How do we see conformity and social rules. Generally, I am of the view that social rules and convention are a starting point and should not be overthrown without a clear reason.
However, l do wonder if many people are thrown into dilemmas which make them question beyond the conventional norms. The Buddhist perspective speaks of the middle way, but even that, could become too concrete. My own view is that we probably need to keep standing on our toes, thinking, reflecting and evaluating, rather than looking for any easy recipes or solutions to the large debate about wisdom.
There are many fine details to moral judgement but its usually within the idea of valuing a social construct or object over the lives or wellbeings of any living thing to be the negative outcome of ethics/morals.
I do think that the question of how morality and ethics are identical or not is important Sometimes the terms morality and ethics are used as if they are identical. The ideas are fluid, but I do believe that morality comes down to a particular perspective, whereas ethics, involves a wider evaluation of ideas for considering, but ,is possible that this is an not clearcut. I do believe that ethics and morality are related to wisdom, but wonder if the values and ideals are more important than the actual translation of such ideals into practice. I am not trying to say that wisdom is not essential to life, but just wondering to what extent it is at the forefront of the daily basis of living, or as an intrinsic value which comes into play, as an idea and ideal, behind the scenes of practical living.
I have looked at you link, and I do think that poetry can capture aspects of wisdom so well. It may be about the finding bridges between intuition and rationality in our understanding. Also, when I was reading the thread, I became aware of one poem emphasising the importance of mindfulness. I think that this is important as a concept in thr philosophy of wisdom and is also of relevance to the practical aspects of human living.
Yes. I was specifically pointing out Amity's quotation of the poem "Wisdom and Follies Haikus
by George Bruce". It was making the point, in poetry, and more eloquently than I, about brevity and wisdom and foolishness.
I think that you are right to point to uncertainty as a starting point. It may be that for people from many eras, long before Wittgenstein that this was a key aspect for thinking about all else. It may be that the more we try to predict and formulate on the basis of what may be expected that this will let us down.
:100: :up: My attempt to link them by raising this question I'd alluded to earlier ...
Quoting 180 Proof
I am not really trying to say that wisdom is purely subjective, but that the outward quantification of ascribing it to individuals could be problematic. It may be that we can perceive wisdom but that is a whole approach to life rather than any specific act or views. I really do think it is easier to see folly in others, and in ourselves, because it glares, and it leaves a trail of misfortune and chaos.