It’s about wisdom

[coberst]

It’s about wisdom

 

 

Does Winston Churchill qualify as a good example of a man of wisdom? Definitely!

 

In the spring of 08 I want to begin the quest for wisdom. How do I ‘get ready’ for becoming wise?

 

Starting with the definition of wisdom as “seeing life whole” seems to be as good a place to begin as I can think of. How do I get ready to see life whole?

 

It seems to me that to see life whole I must learn a great deal more than I already have learned but I must start with where I presently am. I am convinced that learning new stuff requires three aspects (a position facing a particular direction) of mind; mentally I must have curiosity, caring, and an orderly mind.

 

Does Winston Churchill qualify as a good example of a man of wisdom? Definitely!

 

I think that there are at least three forms of intellection: textual intellection is what we do when we reason in text form, artistic intellection is reasoning in artistic form, and practical intellection is what we do in our day-to-day living.

 

I think that one must acquire a significant degree of understanding in each of these three forms of intellection to qualify for the distinction of “seeing life whole”.

 

Winston was an accomplished painter, he was a historian with many books to his credit and he was accomplished broadly in practical intellection as he demonstrated in his political career.

 

I claim that curiosity and caring are necessary conditions for understanding. Understanding is a far step beyond knowing. I will not examine a matter for the purpose of understanding it unless I am curious about it. I must care enough about the matter to do the intellectual work necessary to understand.

 

Understanding is a step beyond knowing and is seldom required or measured by schooling. Understanding is generally of disinterested knowledge, i.e. disinterested knowledge is an intrinsic (due to the nature of the self) value. Disinterested knowledge is not a means but an end. It is knowledge I seek because I desire to know it. I mean the term ‘disinterested knowledge’ as similar to ‘pure research’, as compared to ‘applied research’. Pure research seeks to know truth unconnected to any specific application.

 

Understanding is often difficult and time consuming and the justification is not extrinsic (outside cause) but intrinsic.

 

Questions for consideration:

Is caring necessary for understanding? I think so.

Is curiosity necessary for knowing? I think so.

Is curiosity necessary for understanding? I think so.

Is a knowledge of history required to ‘see life whole’? Absolutely!!

Is difficulty our duty? I think so.

[jedaisoul]

In the spring of 08 I want to begin the quest for wisdom. How do I ‘get ready’ for becoming wise?

Welcome to the path less trod, I hope you search is fruitful. I'll just add a few words that, I hope, will be of assistance...

 

Starting with the definition of wisdom as “seeing life whole” seems to be as good a place to begin as I can think of.

I would suggest that "seeing life whole" is a pre-requisite of wisdom rather than wisdom itself. Wisdom is about making decisions that are appropriate in a specific context.

 

To make appropriate decisions you need to understand the context, other peoples point of view, and the likely outcomes of the various options. That is very much part of "seeing life whole", but two people with the same knowledge can make very different decisions. The wise man will make the best decision that the circumstances allow. A fool will make an inappropriate decision, even though he may be equally appraised of the facts. But even a wise man needs to be appraised of the facts in order to make a good decision. Hence "seeing life whole" is a pre-requisite of wisdom. Wisdom is the decision making based on that knowledge.

 

Does Winston Churchill qualify as a good example of a man of wisdom?

Winston Churchill, like many upper-class Englishmen (and women) of his day, was a racist, and believed that the British Empire was a good thing. It brought civilisation to backward, inferior, peoples and nations. He was a drunken womaniser, pompous and over confident of his own abilities. Hopefully our views have moved on from the "wisdom" of his day and class.

 

His army career, like his political one, was marked by failures. He was personally responsible for many of the worst military decisions made by the allies during the second world war. Yet he was the right man, in the right place, at a time when his nation, and the world, needed him. However, even his "finest hour", when Britain stood alone against the might of Germany as rulers of Europe, was badly judged. Germany could, and should, have won the Battle of Britain, which would have sealed our fate. Indeed, they very nearly did. But more importantly, it was a battle the Germans did not want, or need, to fight. Hitler offered Churchill a truce. Britain could keep it's freedom, and it's empire, if we agreed to stand aside and not meddle in Europe. Churchill refused. Now morally, that was the right decision, but at the time it was foolhardy in the extreem. Only and even worse blunder by Hitler saved Churchill's (and our) future. That was the decision to switch to bombing London instead of our defenses (particularly our airfields). Sustained bombing of our airfields would have won the war. That's not just my opinion.

 

So he was a bombast, and a fool. But, as I said, he was the right man in the right place at the time. Was Churchill a wise man? No. He was just incredibly lucky, and sometimes that matters more.

 

So if you are seeking wisdom, look elsewhere...

[coberst]

Welcome to the path less trod, I hope you search is fruitful. I'll just add a few words that, I hope, will be of assistance...

 

 

I would suggest that "seeing life whole" is a pre-requisite of wisdom rather than wisdom itself. Wisdom is about making decisions that are appropriate in a specific context.

 

To make appropriate decisions you need to understand the context, other peoples point of view, and the likely outcomes of the various options. That is very much part of "seeing life whole", but two people with the same knowledge can make very different decisions. The wise man will make the best decision that the circumstances allow. A fool will make an inappropriate decision, even though he may be equally appraised of the facts. But even a wise man needs to be appraised of the facts in order to make a good decision. Hence "seeing life whole" is a pre-requisite of wisdom. Wisdom is the decision making based on that knowledge.

 

 

Well said!

 

Everybody comprehends how the intellect can be used to build bridges, or repair a broken bone, or be an accountant but our culture has slowly removed from our comprehension the purpose of an ordered intellect in matters of providing meaning and purpose to life.

 

It appears that the mind has its own ‘grammar’ (system of rules). Many forms of thinking, i.e. math and music or logic, help us construct a solid structure for exercising this grammar. Other types of knowledge, i.e. history, help us because we understand the present through analogies with the past.

 

Creativity is greatly enhanced by the cross-fertilization of multiple sources and kinds of knowledge. The broad scope afforded by a liberal education prepares us to see things in ‘the whole’; we see things holistically (in combination, in completeness, not dissected or fragmented).

 

Some consider that wisdom is “seeing life whole”, every realm of knowledge is necessary for discovering ‘full truth’.

 

It will help you see and feel your defects and to change yourself, to be a better citizen, spouse, human being. Wisdom is seeing life whole--meaning that every realm of knowledge must be consulted to discover a full truth. Knowledge leads to wise action, to the service of God and to an understanding of human nature: "With all your knowledge, get understanding" is the Biblical precept.

John Henry Newman wrote that the pursuit of knowledge will "draw the mind off from things which will harm it," and added that it will renovate man's nature by rescuing him "from that fearful subjection to sense which is his ordinary state." This point--that knowledge will help a person to move from an infatuation with externals and toward worthy considerations--has been often repeated by philosophers for at least three thousand years. And if you consider for a moment the unhappiness caused by our society's slavery to sense and appearance, I think you will agree that a deliverance from that is certainly desirable.