essay on wisdom and knowledge

Easy Literary Lessons

• [email protected]

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell | Knowledge and Wisdom | Bertrand Russell | Key Points | Summary | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lessons

• Post author: easyliterarylessons
• Post published: April 24, 2024
• Post category: Bertrand Russell / ESSAYS
• Post comments: 0 Comments

Table of Contents

Knowledge and Wisdom

Most people would agree that, although our age far surpasses all previous ages in knowledge, there has been no correlative increase in wisdom. But agreement ceases as soon as we attempt to define `wisdom’ and consider means of promoting it. I want to ask first what wisdom is, and then what can be done to teach it. There are, I think, several factors that contribute to wisdom. Of these I should put first a sense of proportion: the capacity to take account of all the important factors in a problem and to attach to each its due weight. This has become more difficult than it used to be owing to the extent and complexity fo the specialized knowledge required of various kinds of technicians. Suppose, for example, that you are engaged in research in scientific medicine. The work is difficult and is likely to absorb the whole of your intellectual energy. You have not time to consider the effect which your discoveries or inventions may have outside the field of medicine. You succeed (let us say), as modern medicine has succeeded, in enormously lowering the infant death-rate, not only in Europe and America, but also in Asia and Africa. This has the entirely unintended result of making the food supply inadequate and lowering the standard of life in the most populous parts of the world. To take an even more spectacular example, which is in everybody’s mind at the present time: You study the composistion of the atom from a disinterested desire for knowledge, and incidentally place in the hands of powerful lunatics the means of destroying the human race. In such ways the pursuit of knowledge may becorem harmful unless it is combined with wisdom; and wisdom in the sense of comprehensive vision is not necessarily present in specialists in the pursuit of knowledge. Comprehensiveness alone, however, is not enough to constitute wisdom. There must be, also, a certain awareness of the ends of human life. This may be illustrated by the study of history. Many eminent historians have done more harm than good because they viewed facts through the distorting medium of their own passions. Hegel had a philosophy of history which did not suffer from any lack of comprehensiveness, since it started from the earliest times and continued into an indefinite future. But the chief lesson of history which he sought to unculcate was that from the year 400AD down to his own time Germany had been the most important nation and the standard-bearer of progress in the world. Perhaps one could stretch the comprehensiveness that contitutes wisdom to include not only intellect but also feeling. It is by no means uncommon to find men whose knowledge is wide but whose feelings are narrow. Such men lack what I call wisdom. It is not only in public ways, but in private life equally, that wisdom is needed. It is needed in the choice of ends to be pursued and in emancipation from personal prejudice. Even an end which it would be noble to pursue if it were attainable may be pursued unwisely if it is inherently impossible of achievement. Many men in past ages devoted their lives to a search for the philosopher’s stone and the elixir of life. No doubt, if they could have found them, they would have conferred great benefits upon mankind, but as it was their lives were wasted. To descend to less heroic matters, consider the case of two men, Mr A and Mr B, who hate each other and, through mutual hatred, bring each other to destruction. Suppose you dgo the Mr A and say, ‘Why do you hate Mr B?’ He will no doubt give you an appalling list of Mr B’s vices, partly true, partly false. And now suppose you go to Mr B. He will give you an exactly similar list of Mr A’s vices with an equal admixture of truth and falsehood. Suppose you now come back to Mr A and say, ‘You will be surprised too learn that Mr B says the same things about you as you say about him’, and you go to Mr B and make a similar speech. The first effect, no doubt, will be to increase their mutual hatred, since each will be so horrified by the other’s injustice. But perhaps, if you have sufficient patience and sufficient persuasiveness, you may succeed in convincing each that the other has only the normal share of human wickedness, and that their enmity is harmful to both. If you can do this, you will have instilled some fragment of wisdom. I think the essence of wisdom is emancipation, as fat as possible, from the tyranny of the here and now. We cannot help the egoism of our senses. Sight and sound and touch are bound up with our own bodies and cannot be impersonal. Our emotions start similarly from ourselves. An infant feels hunger or discomfort, and is unaffected except by his own physical condition. Gradually with the years, his horizon widens, and, in proportion as his thoughts and feelings become less personal and less concerned with his own physical states, he achieves growing wisdom. This is of course a matter of degree. No one can view the world with complete impartiality; and if anyone could, he would hardly be able to remain alive. But it is possible to make a continual approach towards impartiality, on the one hand, by knowing things somewhat remote in time or space, and on the other hand, by giving to such things their due weight in our feelings. It is this approach towards impartiality that constitutes growth in wisdom. Can wisdom in this sense be taught? And, if it can, should the teaching of it be one of the aims of education? I should answer both these questions in the affirmative. We are told on Sundays that we should love our neighbors as ourselves. On the other six days of the week, we are exhorted to hate. But you will remember that the precept was exemplified by saying that the Samaritan was our neighbour. We no longer have any wish to hate Samaritans and so we are apt to miss the point of the parable. If you wnat to get its point, you should substitute Communist or anti-Communist, as the case may be, for Samaritan. It might be objected that it is right to hate those who do harm. I do not think so. If you hate them, it is only too likely that you will become equally harmful; and it is very unlikely that you will induce them to abandon their evil ways. Hatred of evil is itself a kind of bondage to evil. The way out is through understanding, not through hate. I am not advocating non-resistance. But I am saying that resistance, if it is to be effective in preventing the spread of evil, should be combined with the greatest degree of understanding and the smallest degree of force that is compatible with the survival of the good things that we wish to preserve. It is commonly urged that a point of view such as I have been advocating is incompatible with vigour in action. I do not think history bears out this view. Queen Elizabeth I in England and Henry IV in France lived in a world where almost everybody was fanatical, either on the Protestant or on the Catholic side. Both remained free from the errors of their time and both, by remaining free, were beneficent and certainly not ineffective. Abraham Lincoln conducted a great war without ever departing from what I have called wisdom. I have said that in some degree wisdom can be taught. I think that this teaching should have a larger intellectual element than has been customary in what has been thought of as moral instruction. I think that the disastrous results of hatred and narrow-mindedness to those who feel them can be pointed out incidentally in the course of giving knowledge. I do not think that knowledge and morals ought to be too much separated. It is true that the kind of specialized knowledge which is required for various kinds of skill has very little to do with wisdom. But it should be supplemented in education by wider surveys calculated to put it in its place in the total of human activities. Even the best technicians should also be good citizens; and when I say ‘citizens’, I mean citizens of the world and not of this or that sect or nation. With every increase of knowledge and skill, wisdom becomes more necessary, for every such increase augments our capacity of realizing our purposes, and therefore augments our capacity for evil, if our purposes are unwise. The world needs wisdom as it has never needed it before; and if knowledge continues to increase, the world will need wisdom in the future even more than it does now.

Bertrand Russell’s reflections on knowledge and wisdom are insightful and raise important considerations about the relationship between the two. Here are some key points from the text: Knowledge vs. Wisdom: Russell begins by pointing out the apparent disconnect between the vast increase in knowledge in his time and the lack of a corresponding increase in wisdom. While knowledge involves the acquisition of information, wisdom is characterized by a sense of proportion, awareness of human ends, and the ability to make judicious choices. Comprehensive Vision: Russell emphasizes the importance of comprehensiveness in wisdom, the capacity to consider all relevant factors in a problem and assign them their due weight. Specialized knowledge, while valuable, can lead to unintended consequences if not combined with a broader understanding of its implications. Awareness of Ends: Wisdom involves an awareness of the ultimate goals of human life. Russell uses the example of historians who, driven by personal passions, may distort facts. Understanding the broader context and purpose of one’s actions is crucial in the pursuit of wisdom. Emotional Intelligence: Russell suggests that wisdom includes emotional intelligence. Men with wide knowledge but narrow feelings lack wisdom. The ability to empathize, understand others, and manage one’s emotions is essential for a wise perspective. Emancipation from the Present: Russell sees the essence of wisdom as emancipation from the tyranny of the present moment. As individuals move beyond personal concerns and develop a broader perspective, they approach impartiality and grow in wisdom. Teaching Wisdom: Russell argues that wisdom, to some extent, can be taught. He suggests that education should aim to instill wisdom by combining intellectual elements with moral instruction. The understanding of the consequences of hatred and narrow-mindedness should be integrated into knowledge dissemination. Hatred and Understanding: Russell challenges the idea that hatred of evil is productive. Instead, he advocates for understanding as a way to combat evil effectively. Resistance, in his view, should be coupled with a deep understanding and minimal force necessary to preserve the good. Compatibility of Wisdom and Vigor in Action: Contrary to the belief that wisdom may hinder vigorous action, Russell cites historical figures like Queen Elizabeth I, Henry IV, and Abraham Lincoln as examples of leaders who combined wisdom with effective action. Global Citizenship: Russell concludes by emphasizing the need for citizens, even skilled technicians, to be good citizens of the world. Wisdom becomes increasingly crucial with the growth of knowledge, as the capacity for both good and evil expands.

Author Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher, logician, essayist, and social critic. He is best known for his work in mathematical logic and analytic philosophy. His contributions to logic, epistemology, and the philosophy of mathematics established him as one of the foremost philosophers of the 20th century. In 1950, Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature “in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian ideals and freedom of thought.” Introduction In the essay “Knowledge and Wisdom,” Russell explores the relationship between knowledge and wisdom. He begins by defining knowledge as the awareness and understanding of facts, information, descriptions, or skills acquired through experience or education. On the other hand, he defines wisdom as the ability to think and act using knowledge, experience, understanding, common sense, and insight. Russell emphasizes that while knowledge is necessary, it is not sufficient. Wisdom is needed to use knowledge in a way that promotes well-being and ethical values. Structure The essay is structured as a series of reflections and observations. Russell uses a variety of examples from history and contemporary society to illustrate his points. The essay is not divided into sections or chapters, but it follows a logical progression from the introduction of the topic to the exploration of the relationship between knowledge and wisdom, and finally to the conclusion where Russell emphasizes the importance of wisdom. Setting The setting of the essay is not a physical location but the intellectual and philosophical landscape in which Russell was writing. He discusses the role of knowledge and wisdom in society and the dangers of knowledge without wisdom. The essay reflects the intellectual climate of the early 20th century, but its themes and insights remain relevant today. Theme The main theme of the essay is the distinction between knowledge and wisdom. Russell argues that knowledge is about facts and information, while wisdom is about understanding and applying this knowledge in a meaningful and ethical way. He emphasizes that wisdom is more important than knowledge because it leads to a better understanding of the world and a more fulfilling life. Style Russell’s style in this essay is clear, concise, and thought-provoking. He uses logical arguments and real-world examples to make his points. His writing is accessible to a general audience, but also offers deep insights for those familiar with philosophical concepts. Russell’s style is characterized by clarity, precision, and a commitment to logical reasoning. Message The key message of the essay is the importance of wisdom in using knowledge. Russell warns of the dangers of knowledge without wisdom, giving examples of how knowledge can be misused when not tempered with wisdom. He advocates for the integration of wisdom into education, arguing that knowledge alone can lead to its misuse. He also discusses several factors that contribute to wisdom, including a sense of proportion, comprehensiveness with broad feeling, emancipation from personal prejudices, and the tyranny of sensory perception. The essay is a call to action for individuals and societies to value and cultivate wisdom.

Bertrand Russell

Full Name: Bertrand Arthur William Russell. Title: 3rd Earl Russell. Birth: He was born on 18 May 1872 in Trellech, Wales, United Kingdom. Death: He died on 2 February 1970 in Penrhyndeudraeth, Wales, UK. Profession: He was a British philosopher, logician, and mathematician. Work: He worked mostly in the 20th century. Nobel Prize: He won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1950. Contributions: He wrote many books and articles and tried to make philosophy popular1. He gave his opinion on many topics. Famous Essay: He wrote the essay, “On Denoting”, which has been described as one of the most influential essays in philosophy in the 20th Century. Political Views: He was a well-known liberal as well as a socialist and anti-war activist for most of his long life. Beliefs: In his 1949 speech, “Am I an Atheist or an Agnostic?”, Russell expressed his difficulty over whether to call himself an atheist or an agnostic.

Very Short Answer Questions

Who is the author of “Knowledge and Wisdom”? The author is Bertrand Russell. What is the main theme of the essay? The main theme is the distinction between knowledge and wisdom. What is knowledge according to Russell? Knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information. What is wisdom according to Russell? Wisdom is the practical application and use of knowledge to create value. How is wisdom gained? Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization. What is the danger of knowledge without wisdom? Knowledge without wisdom can lead to misuse and harm. What are the factors that contribute to wisdom? Factors include a sense of proportion, comprehensiveness with broad feeling, emancipation from personal prejudices, and the tyranny of sensory perception. What is the message conveyed with the example of technicians? Knowledge alone cannot save the world and, in certain situations, may threaten mankind. Which leaders were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly? Leaders like Queen Elizabeth I of England, Henry IV of France, and Abraham Lincoln. What is the style of Russell’s writing in this essay? The style is clear, concise, and thought-provoking. What is the setting of the essay? The setting is the intellectual and philosophical landscape in which Russell was writing. What is the structure of the essay? The essay is structured as a series of reflections and observations. What is the key message of the essay? The importance of wisdom in using knowledge. What is the danger of knowledge without wisdom according to Russell? It can lead to misuse and harm. What does Russell advocate for in education? The integration of wisdom into education. What is the role of wisdom in society according to Russell? Wisdom is needed to use knowledge in a way that promotes well-being and ethical values. What is the relationship between knowledge and wisdom according to Russell? Wisdom is the practical application and use of knowledge. What is the danger of knowledge without wisdom in the context of scientific discoveries? Scientific discoveries can be misused when not tempered with wisdom. What is the role of wisdom in the use of scientific knowledge according to Russell? Wisdom is needed to use scientific knowledge in a way that promotes well-being and ethical values. What is the impact of wisdom on the quality of life according to Russell? Wisdom leads to a better understanding of the world and a more fulfilling life.

Short Answer Questions

What are the factors that contribute to wisdom according to Russell? Bertrand Russell, in his essay ‘Knowledge and Wisdom’, suggests that wisdom is influenced by several factors: A sense of proportion: This is the capacity to carefully evaluate all of the key aspects of a subject. It’s challenging due to specialization. For example, scientists develop novel drugs but may not fully understand how these medicines will affect people’s lives. Awareness of the ends of human life: This involves understanding the broader implications of actions and decisions, such as how a decrease in infant mortality due to new medicines could lead to a population increase and potential food crisis. Choice of ends to pursue: Wisdom is needed to decide our life’s objectives and to discern which goals are worth pursuing. Emancipation from personal prejudice: Wisdom helps free us from personal biases, enabling us to make more objective and fair decisions.

What message does Russell try to convey with the example of technicians? Russell uses the example of technicians to illustrate the potential harm that can result from applying technical knowledge without wisdom. He suggests that if technical knowledge is implemented without considering the broader implications, it can lead to destructive outcomes for humanity.

Which leaders does Russell say were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly? Russell cites Queen Elizabeth I of England, Henry IV of France, and Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, as examples of leaders who successfully combined knowledge and wisdom.

Why is wisdom needed not only in public ways, but in private life equally? Wisdom is needed in both public and private life because it helps in decision-making and overcoming personal biases. It is important in setting life goals and being able to persuade others. Without wisdom, one may not be able to make the right choices or effectively communicate their beliefs.

What is the true aim of education according to Russell? According to Russell, the true aim of education is to instill wisdom in individuals. Wisdom allows people to apply their knowledge in a way that doesn’t cause harm, and it is crucial for being a responsible and good citizen.

Can wisdom be taught? There are differing views on whether wisdom can be taught. Some sources suggest that wisdom-related skills can, to a certain extent, be taught. Teaching experiments have been made as part of university education, with successful examples of wisdom pedagogy including reading great philosophers or classic texts, discussing the texts in the classroom, and writing different kinds of reflection diaries related to one’s own beliefs and values. However, other sources suggest that wisdom cannot be taught, but only sought. It is achieved as a synthesis in reflection by individuals who are facing a practical need or a theoretical challenge of orientation.

Why does the world need more wisdom in the future? The world needs more wisdom in the future because with advancements in knowledge and technology, people may make unwise decisions and cause harm if they don’t have wisdom to guide them. Wisdom is crucial for making responsible and informed choices, and it is necessary for a brighter future.

How does Russell define wisdom? Russell defines wisdom as the ability to use knowledge, understanding, experience, common sense, and insight to make sound decisions and sensible judgments. Wisdom helps a person to overcome multiple difficult situations that he may encounter and get out of them with the least possible losses.

What is the difference between knowledge and wisdom according to Russell? According to Russell, knowledge and wisdom are different things. Knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization.

What is the role of wisdom in the use of knowledge? Wisdom plays a crucial role in the use of knowledge. It provides the necessary perspective and insight required to make good decisions. It involves using knowledge to understand the situation, consider the consequences, and weigh the options before making a decision. Wisdom is essential in applying knowledge as it provides the necessary perspective and insight required to make sound decisions and sensible judgments.

Essay Type Questions

Write the critical appreciation of the essay..

Introduction Bertrand Russell, a renowned British philosopher, logician, and Nobel laureate, explores the relationship between knowledge and wisdom in his essay “Knowledge and Wisdom”. He emphasizes the importance of wisdom and suggests that in the absence of it, knowledge can be dangerous.

Definition of Wisdom Russell defines wisdom as the ability to use knowledge, understanding, experience, common sense, and insight to make sound decisions. He describes the factors that influence wisdom, including a sense of proportion, comprehensiveness with broad feeling, emancipation from personal prejudices and the tyranny of sensory perception, impartiality, and awareness of human needs and understanding.

Wisdom vs Knowledge Russell distinguishes between knowledge and wisdom. He states that knowledge involves acquiring data, while wisdom involves practical application and value creation through learning and experience. He critiques the global explosion of knowledge but emphasizes that knowledge and wisdom are not synonymous.

The Role of Wisdom Russell argues that wisdom is needed not only in public ways but in private life equally. In deciding what goals to follow and overcoming personal prejudice, wisdom is needed. He also suggests that wisdom is gained when a person’s thoughts and feelings become less persona.

The Danger of Knowledge Without Wisdom Russell gives the example of scientists and historians to illustrate how knowledge without wisdom can be dangerous. Scientists develop novel drugs but may not fully understand how these medicines will affect people’s lives. Similarly, historians like Hegel wrote with historical knowledge and made the Germans believe they were a master race, and this false sense of pride drove them to war.

The Aim of Education Russell believes that the true aim of education is to instill wisdom in individuals. He is assured that wisdom must be an integral part of education because a person can be well educated but lack the wisdom to understand the true meaning of life. Wisdom is required in education because knowledge alone leads to its misuse.

Conclusion In conclusion, Russell’s essay “Knowledge and Wisdom” is a profound exploration of the relationship between knowledge and wisdom. It emphasizes the importance of wisdom in using knowledge responsibly and highlights the dangers of knowledge without wisdom. The essay is a call to action for individuals and society to strive for wisdom, not just knowledge.

Detailed Analysis Russell begins his essay by differentiating between knowledge and wisdom. He defines knowledge as the acquisition of data and information, whereas wisdom is the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. He emphasizes that wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization. He then discusses the factors that contribute to wisdom. According to him, a sense of proportion, comprehensiveness with broad feeling, emancipation from personal prejudices and the tyranny of sensory perception, impartiality, and awareness of human needs and understanding are all factors that contribute to wisdom. Russell also discusses the dangers of knowledge without wisdom. He uses the example of scientists and historians to illustrate this point. Scientists develop novel drugs but have no idea how these medicines will affect people’s lives. Drugs may help lower the infant mortality rate. However, it may result in a rise in population, and the world is sure to face the consequences of the rise in population. Once, Hegel, the greatest historian, wrote with historical knowledge and made the Germans believe they were a master race, and this false sense of pride drove them to war. Russell emphasizes the importance of wisdom in both public and private life. He suggests that wisdom is needed to decide the goal of our life and to free ourselves from personal prejudices. He also suggests that wisdom emerges when we begin to value things that do not directly affect us. In the end, Russell discusses the role of education in instilling wisdom. He believes that the true aim of education is to instill wisdom in individuals. He is assured that wisdom must be an integral part of education because a person can be well educated but lack the wisdom to understand the true meaning of life. Wisdom is required in education because knowledge alone leads to its misuse. In conclusion, Russell’s essay “Knowledge and Wisdom” is a profound exploration of the relationship between knowledge and wisdom. It emphasizes the importance of wisdom in using knowledge responsibly and highlights the dangers of knowledge without wisdom. The essay is a call to action for individuals and society to strive for wisdom, not just knowledge.

Write long note on Bertrand Russell as Essayist.

Bertrand Russell, a British philosopher, logician, and social reformer, was also a prolific essayist whose works have had a profound influence on the 20th century intellectual landscape. Style and Approach Russell’s essays are characterized by a clear, logical style and a precise approach. He always argues his case in a strictly logical manner and his aim is exactitude or precision. As far as possible, he never leaves the reader in any doubt about what he has to say. He stresses the need for rationality, which he calls skepticism in all spheres of life. Each of his essays is logically well-knit and self-contained. Themes and Topics Russell’s essays cover a wide range of topics, reflecting his broad interests and deep knowledge. He wrote on philosophy, mathematics, logic, social reform, and peace advocacy. His essays often addressed contemporary social, political, and moral subjects, making them relevant and accessible to a general audience. Influence and Impact Russell’s essays have had a significant impact on various fields. His contributions to logic, epistemology, and the philosophy of mathematics established him as one of the foremost philosophers of the 20th century. However, to the general public, he was best known as a campaigner for peace and as a popular writer on social, political, and moral subjects. Recognition Russell’s work as an essayist and writer was recognized with the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1950. This award attests to the quality of his writing and the influence of his ideas. In conclusion, Bertrand Russell’s work as an essayist is characterized by its clarity, precision, and logical rigor. His essays, which cover a wide range of topics, have had a significant impact on various fields and continue to be widely read and studied.

Free Full PDF Download Now  Click Here

Please share this share this content.

• Opens in a new window

You Might Also Like

Dream Children by Charles Lamb | Dream Children: A Reverie | Charles Lamb | Summary | Key Points | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Critical Appreciation | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lesson

Of Youth and Age by Francis Bacon | Of Youth and Age | Francis Bacon | Francis Bacon as Essayist | Summary | Key Points | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Critical Appreciation | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lesson

On an Educational Reform by Hilaire Belloc | On an Educational Reform | Summary | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lessons

EL Dorado by RL Stevenson | EL Dorado | RL Stevenson | Free Full PDF – Easy Literary Lessons

Third Thoughts by EV Lucas | EV Lucas | Summary | Word Meaning | Key Points | Questions Answers | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lessons

Fearlessness by MK Gandhi | Fearlessness | MK Gandhi | Mahatma Gandhi | Summary | Key Points | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Critical Appreciation | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lesson

Popular Superstitions by Joseph Addison | Popular Superstitions | Joseph Addison | Summary | Key Points | Word Meaning | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lesson

Of Studies by Francis Bacon | Of Studies Essay | Francis Bacon | Explanation | Summary | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lessons

Getting Up on Cold Mornings by Leigh Hunt | Getting Up on Cold Mornings | Leigh Hunt | Summary | Key Points | Word Meaning | Questions Answers | Free PDF Download – Easy Literary Lesson

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

“Wisdom” vs. “Knowledge”: What’s The Difference?

Is it better to have wisdom or knowledge ? Can you have one without the other? And which comes first? If you’ve ever searched for acumen into these two brainy terms, we’re here to help break them down. 

Wisdom and knowledge have quite a bit in common. Both words are primarily used as nouns that are related to learning. They’re listed as synonyms for one another in Thesaurus.com , and in some cases they may be used interchangeably.

In this article, we’ll explain the difference between knowledge and wisdom , what they mean and how their meanings overlap, and explain how to understand them with the help of some useful quotes. 

What is the difference between knowledge and wisdom ?

The word knowledge is defined first as the “acquaintance with facts, truths or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition .” It is recorded at least by the 1300s as the Middle English knouleche , which combines the verb know (a verb that means “ to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty”) and – leche , which may be related to the same suffix we see in wedlock and conveys a sense of “action, practice, or state.”

Knowledge is typically gained through books, research, and delving into facts. Knowledge can also be gained in the bedroom ( hubba hubba !), as the term is sometimes used, albeit archaically , to describe sexual intercourse. As in: they had carnal knowledge of one another. 

Wisdom is defined as “the state of being wise,” which means “having the power of discernment and judging properly as to what is true or right: possessing discernment , judgement, or discretion.” It’s older (recorded before the 900s), and joins wise and -dom , a suffix that can convey “general condition,” as in freedom . Wisdom is typically gained from experiences and acquired over time. 

While wisdom and knowledge are synonyms, the other synonyms for each word, respectively, don’t overlap much. And they give more hints at each word’s unique meaning.

For example, other synonyms for knowledge include:

• familiarity

Other synonyms for wisdom include:

Go Behind The Words!

• By clicking "Sign Up", you are accepting Dictionary.com Terms & Conditions and Privacy policies.
• Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The primary difference between the two words is that wisdom involves a healthy dose of perspective and the ability to make sound judgments about a subject while knowledge is simply knowing. Anyone can become knowledgeable about a subject by reading, researching, and memorizing facts. It’s wisdom, however, that requires more understanding and the ability to determine which facts are relevant in certain situations. Wisdom takes knowledge and applies it with discernment based on experience, evaluation, and lessons learned.

A quote by an unknown author sums up the differences well: “Knowledge is knowing what to say. Wisdom is knowing when to say it.” 

Wisdom is also about knowing when and how to use your knowledge, being able to put situations in perspective, and how to impart it to others. For example, you may be very knowledgeable about how to raise a baby after reading countless books, attending classes, and talking to wise friends and family members. When that precious little person comes home, however, most new parents would kill for an ounce of wisdom to help soothe their screaming baby … and their fears. 

To put it another way, there is this simple fruit salad philosophy: “Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in the fruit salad.”

• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

What comes first: wisdom or knowledge ?

So which comes first, knowledge or wisdom? There’s no chicken-egg scenario here: knowledge always comes first. Wisdom is built upon knowledge. That means you can be both wise and knowledgeable, but you can’t be wise without being knowledgeable. And just because you’re knowledgeable doesn’t mean you’re wise … even though your teenager may feel differently.

As for how long it takes to achieve wisdom, and how you know when you have achieved it, that’s where things get murkier. Albert Einstein famously said, “Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the lifelong attempt to acquire it.” So yeah, it’s one of those journey-not-destination things. There’s no limit to wisdom, however, and you can certainly gain degrees of it along the way. 

So, there you have it. Have you wised up to the differences between the two words yet?

Commonly Confused

Hobbies & Passions

Current Events

Trending Words

[ sahyz -mik ]

Summary of ‘Knowledge and Wisdom’ by Bertrand Russell

• December 28, 2021

Main Summary [Brief]

In this essay, Russell differentiates between knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge and wisdom are different things. According to him, knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization. 

Major Word Meanings of this Essay

proportion (n.): a part or share of a whole 

absorb (v.): to take, draw or suck something in 

distorting (v.): pull or twist out of shape 

inculcate (v.): inplant, infuse, instil 

bound up (v.): to limit something 

fanatical (adj.): a person who is too enthusiastic about something 

Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Arthur William Russell (1872–1970) was a British philosopher, logician, essayist and social critic best known for his work in mathematical logic and analytic philosophy. His most influential contributions include his championing of logicism (the view that mathematics is in some important sense reducible to logic), his refining of Gottlob Frege’s predicate calculus (which still forms the basis of most contemporary systems of logic), his defense of neutral monism (the view that the world consists of just one type of substance which is neither exclusively mental nor exclusively physical), and his theories of definite descriptions, logical atomism and logical types.

Summary of Russell’s Essay, Knowledge and Wisdom

“Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life.”

– Sandra Carey

Knowledge and wisdom are different things. According to Russell, knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization.

A sense of proportion is very much necessary for wisdom. By inventing medicine, a scientist may reduce the infant death-rate. Apparently, it leads to population explosion and shortage of food. The standard of life comes down. If misused, knowledge of atom can lead human to destruction by manufacturing nuclear weapon.

Knowledge without wisdom can be harmful. Even complete knowledge is not enough. For example, Hegel wrote with great knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to war. It is necessary, therefore to combine knowledge with feelings.

We need wisdom both in public and private life. We need wisdom to decide the goal of our life. We need it to free ourselves from personal prejudices. Wisdom is needed to avoid dislike for one another. Two persons may remain enemies because of their prejudice. If they can be told that we all have flaws then they may become friends.

Question Answer of Knowledge & Wisdom

a. What are the factors that contribute to wisdom? 

Ans : – In the essay “Knowledge and Wisdom”, Bertrand Russell talks about several factors that contribute to wisdom. According to him, the factors that contribute to wisdom are :

i) a sense of proportion, 

ii) comprehensiveness with broad feeling, 

iii) emancipation from personal prejudices and tyranny of sensory perception, 

iv) impartiality and

v) awareness of human needs and understanding. 

b. What message does the writer try to convey with the examples of technicians? 

Ans : – Russell has given some examples of technicians to convey the message that the lone technical knowledge can be harmful to humankind if that knowledge is applied without wisdom. They can’t find out how their knowledge in one field can be harmful in another field. For example, the discovery of medicine to decrease the infant mortality rate can cause population growth and food scarcity. Similarly, the knowledge of atomic theory can be misused in making atom bombs. 

c. Which leaders does Russell say were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly? 

Ans : – According to Russell, Queen Elizabeth I in England, Henry IV in France and Abraham Lincoln can mix knowledge and wisdom soundly. Queen Elizabeth I and Henry IV remained free from the errors of their time being Global Trade Starts Here Alibaba.com unaffected by the conflict between the Protestants and the Catholics. Similarly, Abraham Lincoln conducted a great war without ever departing from wisdom. 

d. Why is wisdom needed not only in public ways but in private life equally? 

Ans : – Wisdom is not only needed in public ways but also used in private life equally. It is needed in the choice of ends to be pursued and in emancipation from personal prejudice. In the lack of wisdom, we may fail in choosing the target of our life and we may not have sufficient patience and sufficient persuasiveness in convincing people. 

e. What, according to Russell, the true aim of education? 

Ans : – The true aim of education, according to Russell, is installing wisdom in people. It is wisdom that makes us utilize our knowledge in practical life purposefully without making any harm to humankind. Along with knowledge, people must have the wisdom to be good citizens. 

f. Can wisdom be taught? If so, how? 

Ans : – Yes, wisdom can be taught. The teaching of wisdom should have a larger intellectual element more than moral instruction. The disastrous results of hatred and narrow mindedness to those who feel them can be pointed out incidentally in the course of giving knowledge. For example, while teaching the composition of an atom, the disastrous results of it must be taught to eliminate its misuse such as making an atom bomb. Reference to the Context Answer the following questions. 

a. According to Russell, “The Pursuit of Knowledge may become harmful unless it is combined with wisdom.” Justify this statement. 

Ans : – Humans are curious creatures and they always want to learn new things. Most people have spent their whole lives in pursuit of knowledge. Some pieces of knowledge are noble and beneficial for humans whereas some pieces of knowledge are harmful to us. The knowledge which is combined with wisdom is useful for us because it addresses the total needs of mankind. The knowledge of atomic composition has become harmful to mankind because it is used in making bombs.

Similarly, Hegal, though he had great knowledge about history, made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to the great disastrous wars. So, it is necessary to combine knowledge with the feeling of humanity. We need it an event to decide the aim of our life. It makes us free from personal prejudices. Even noble things are applied unwisely in the lack of wisdom

b. What, according to Russell, is the essence of wisdom? And how can one acquire the very essence?  

Ans : – According to Russell, the essence of wisdom is emancipation from the tyranny of being partiality. It makes our thoughts and feeling less personal and less concerned with our physical states. It is wisdom that makes us care and love the entire human race, it takes us into the higher stage of spirituality. It makes us be able to make the right decision, install a broad vision and unbiasedness in our minds. We can acquire the very essence by breaking the chain of the egoism of our sense, understanding the ends of human life, applying our knowledge wisely for the benefit of humans, finding noble and attainable goals of our life, controlling our sensory perceptions, being impartial gradually and loving others. 

Reference Beyond the Text 

a. Why is wisdom necessary in education? Discuss. Ans : It is wisdom that makes our mind broad and unbiased. When we gain wisdom, our thoughts and feelings become less personal. It makes us use our knowledge wisely. It helps us to utilize our knowledge for the benefit of humankind. When we have wisdom we love even our enemy, we completely get rid of ego, we don’t have any kind of prejudices.

If education/knowledge is one part of human life then wisdom is another part. If one compasses these both parts appropriately, then s/he become a perfect being. The goal of education is not only imparting knowledge but also creating good citizens. People may misuse the acquired knowledge if they don’t have wisdom and it doesn’t come automatically, it must be taught. It must be one of the goals of education and must be taught in schools. It must be planted and nursed in one’s mind with practical examples. 

Understanding the Text 

b. What message does the writer try to convey with the example of technicians?

c. Which leaders does Russell say were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly?

d. Why is wisdom needed not only in public ways, but in private life equally? 

e. What, according to Russell, is the true aim of education? 

g. Why does the world need more wisdom in the future? Reference to the context 

a. According to Russel, “The pursuit of knowledge may become harmful unless it is combined with wisdom.” Justify this statement. 

b. What, according to Russell, is the essence of wisdom? And how can one acquire the very essence? 

Reference beyond the text 

a. Why is wisdom necessary in education? Discuss. 

b. How can you become wise? Do you think what you are doing in college contributes to wisdom? 

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

You may like to read:

Teachers’ guide class 10 english pdf download || english guide class10.

• July 29, 2024

Role of Language in Mathematics Education

• July 12, 2024

Reading – II Flowers in Russian Culture || NEB Class 10 History & Culture

• June 23, 2024

Cabbage White – Class 10 Exercise

• May 15, 2024

Summary of Russell’s Essay, Knowledge and Wisdom

“Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life.”

– Sandra Carey

Knowledge and wisdom are different things. According to Russell , knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, while wisdom is defined as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is gained through learning and practical experience, not just memorization.

A sense of proportion is very much necessary for wisdom . By inventing medicine, a scientist may reduce the infant death-rate. Apparently, it leads to population explosion and shortage of food. The standard of life comes down. If misused, knowledge of atom can lead human to destruction by manufacturing nuclear weapon.

Knowledge without wisdom can be harmful. Even complete knowledge is not enough. For example, Hegel wrote with great

knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to war. It is necessary, therefore to combine knowledge with feelings.

We need wisdom both in public and private life. We need wisdom to decide the goal of our life. We need it to free ourselves from personal prejudices. Wisdom is needed to avoid dislike for one another. Two persons may remain enemies because of their prejudice. If they can be told that we all have flaws then they may become friends.

• Russell’s View on World Government in his Essay The Future of Mankind

So, ‘Hate Hatred’ should be our slogan. Wisdom lies in freeing ourselves from the control of our sense organs. Our ego develops through our senses. We cannot be free from the sense of sight, sound and touch. We know the world primarily through our senses. As we grow we discover that there are other things also. We start recognizing them. Thus we give up thinking of ourselves alone. We start thinking of other people and grow wiser. We give up on our ego. Wisdom comes when we start loving others.

Russell feels that wisdom can be taught as a goal of education. Even though we are born unwise which we cannot help, we can cultivate wisdom. Queen Elizabeth I, Henry IV and Abraham Lincoln, are some impressive personalities who fused vigour with wisdom and fought the evil.

Related posts:

• Russell’s View on World Government in his Essay The Future of Mankind
• Indian English Poetry and Poets: An Essay
• Character Analysis of Sir Roger de Coverley in Addison’s Essay
• Bertrand Russell as a Prose Writer
• Summary of E. V. Lucas’ Essay The Town Week

8 thoughts on “Summary of Russell’s Essay, Knowledge and Wisdom”

Great article with excellent idea!Thank you for such a valuable article. I really appreciate for this great information.. quora

Really nice and well informative article wrote in a very concise and beautiful manner

thank you for a great post. กาแฟออแกนิค

Critical analysis plz post

An examination essay dissects the likenesses and contrasts between two items or thoughts. Correlation essays may incorporate an assessment, if the realities show that on item or thought is better than another. narrative essay outline

A doctor may invent medicine which reduces infant mortality rate. Consequently, it may lead to population explosion and shortage of food. That shows a lack of KNOWLEDGE itself. Not knowing the consequences rather than “Wisdom” stuff that Russell talks about here

I am satisfied with the arrangement of your post. You are really a talented person I have ever seen.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

From Knowledge to Wisdom

The Key to Wisdom

Nicholas Maxwell University College London

Section 1 of " Arguing for Wisdom in the University: An Intellectual Autobiography ", Philosophia , vol 40, no. 4, 2012. Nearly forty years ago I discovered a profoundly significant idea - or so I believe. Since then, I have expounded and developed the idea in six books [1] and countless articles published in academic journals and other books. [2] I have talked about the idea in universities and at conferences all over the UK, in Europe, the USA and Canada. And yet, alas, despite all this effort, few indeed are those who have even heard of the idea. I have not even managed to communicate the idea to my fellow philosophers. What did I discover? Quite simply: the key to wisdom. For over two and a half thousand years, philosophy (which means "love of wisdom") has sought in vain to discover how humanity might learn to become wise - how we might learn to create an enlightened world. For the ancient Greek philosophers, Socrates, Plato and the rest, discovering how to become wise was the fundamental task for philosophy. In the modern period, this central, ancient quest has been laid somewhat to rest, not because it is no longer thought important, but rather because the quest is seen as unattainable. The record of savagery and horror of the last century is so extreme and terrible that the search for wisdom, more important than ever, has come to seem hopeless, a quixotic fantasy. Nevertheless, it is this ancient, fundamental problem, lying at the heart of philosophy, at the heart, indeed, of all of thought, morality, politics and life, that I have solved. Or so I believe. When I say I have discovered the key to wisdom, I should say, more precisely, that I have discovered the methodological key to wisdom. Or perhaps, more modestly, I should say that I have discovered that science contains, locked up in its astounding success in acquiring knowledge and understanding of the universe, the methodological key to wisdom. I have discovered a recipe for creating a kind of organized inquiry rationally designed and devoted to helping humanity learn wisdom, learn to create a more enlightened world. What we have is a long tradition of inquiry - extraordinarily successful in its own terms - devoted to acquiring knowledge and technological know-how. It is this that has created the modern world, or at least made it possible. But scientific knowledge and technological know-how are ambiguous blessings, as more and more people, these days, are beginning to recognize. They do not guarantee happiness. Scientific knowledge and technological know-how enormously increase our power to act. In endless ways, this vast increase in our power to act has been used for the public good - in health, agriculture, transport, communications, and countless other ways. But equally, this enhanced power to act can be used to cause human harm, whether unintentionally, as in environmental damage (at least initially), or intentionally, as in war. It is hardly too much to say that all our current global problems have come about because of science and technology. The appalling destructiveness of modern warfare and terrorism, vast inequalities in wealth and standards of living between first and third worlds, rapid population growth, environmental damage - destruction of tropical rain forests, rapid extinction of species, global warming, pollution of sea, earth and air, depletion of finite natural resources - all only exist today because of modern science and technology. Science and technology lead to modern industry and agriculture, to modern medicine and hygiene, and thus in turn to population growth, to modern armaments, conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear, to destruction of natural habitats, extinction of species, pollution, and to immense inequalities of wealth across the globe. Science without wisdom, we might say, is a menace. It is the crisis behind all the others. When we lacked our modern, terrifying powers to act, before the advent of science, lack of wisdom did not matter too much: we were bereft of the power to inflict too much damage on ourselves and the planet. Now that we have modern science, and the unprecedented powers to act that it has bequeathed to us, wisdom has become, not a private luxury, but a public necessity. If we do not rapidly learn to become wiser, we are doomed to repeat in the 21st century all the disasters and horrors of the 20th: the horrifyingly destructive wars, the dislocation and death of millions, the degradation of the world we live in. Only this time round it may all be much worse, as the population goes up, the planet becomes ever more crowded, oil and other resources vital to our way of life run out, weapons of mass destruction become more and more widely available for use, and deserts and desolation spread. The ancient quest for wisdom has become a matter of desperate urgency. It is hardly too much to say that the future of the world is at stake. But how can such a quest possibly meet with success? Wisdom, surely, is not something that we can learn and teach, as a part of our normal education, in schools and universities? This is my great discovery! Wisdom can be learnt and taught in schools and universities. It must be so learnt and taught. Wisdom is indeed the proper fundamental objective for the whole of the academic enterprise: to help humanity learn how to nurture and create a wiser world. But how do we go about creating a kind of education, research and scholarship that really will help us learn wisdom? Would not any such attempt destroy what is of value in what we have at present, and just produce hot air, hypocrisy, vanity and nonsense? Or worse, dogma and religious fundamentalism? What, in any case, is wisdom? Is not all this just an abstract philosophical fantasy? The answer, as I have already said, lies locked away in what may seem a highly improbably place: science! This will seem especially improbable to many of those most aware of environmental issues, and most suspicious of the role of modern science and technology in modern life. How can science contain the methodological key to wisdom when it is precisely this science that is behind so many of our current troubles? But a crucial point must be noted. Modern scientific and technological research has met with absolutely astonishing, unprecedented success, as long as this success is interpreted narrowly, in terms of the production of expert knowledge and technological know-how. Doubts may be expressed about whether humanity as a whole has made progress towards well being or happiness during the last century or so. But there can be no serious doubt whatsoever that science has made staggering intellectual progress in increasing expert knowledge and know-how, during such a period. It is this astonishing intellectual progress that makes science such a powerful but double-edged tool, for good and for bad. At once the question arises: Can we learn from the incredible intellectual progress of science how to achieve progress in other fields of human endeavour? Is scientific progress exportable, as it were, to other areas of life? More precisely, can the progress-achieving methods of science be generalized so that they become fruitful for other worthwhile, problematic human endeavours, in particular the supremely worthwhile, supremely problematic endeavour of creating a good and wise world? My great idea - that this can indeed be done - is not entirely new (as I was to learn after making my discovery). It goes back to the 18th century Enlightenment. This was indeed the key idea of the Enlightenment, especially the French Enlightenment: to learn from scientific progress how to achieve social progress towards an enlightened world. And the philosophes of the Enlightenment, men such as Voltaire, Diderot and Condorcet, did what they could to put this magnificent, profound idea into practice in their lives. They fought dictatorial power, superstition, and injustice with weapons no more lethal than those of argument and wit. They gave their support to the virtues of tolerance, openness to doubt, readiness to learn from criticism and from experience. Courageously and energetically they laboured to promote reason and enlightenment in personal and social life. Unfortunately, in developing the Enlightenment idea intellectually, the philosophes blundered. They botched the job. They developed the Enlightenment idea in a profoundly defective form, and it is this immensely influential, defective version of the idea, inherited from the 18th century, which may be called the "traditional" Enlightenment, that is built into early 21st century institutions of inquiry. Our current traditions and institutions of learning, when judged from the standpoint of helping us learn how to become more enlightened, are defective and irrational in a wholesale and structural way, and it is this which, in the long term, sabotages our efforts to create a more civilized world, and prevents us from avoiding the kind of horrors we have been exposed to during the last century. The task before us is thus not that of creating a kind of inquiry devoted to improving wisdom out of the blue, as it were, with nothing to guide us except two and a half thousand years of failed philosophical discussion. Rather, the task is the much more straightforward, practical and well-defined one of correcting the structural blunders built into academic inquiry inherited from the Enlightenment. We already have a kind of academic inquiry designed to help us learn wisdom. The problem is that the design is lousy. It is, as I have said, a botched job. It is like a piece of engineering that kills people because of faulty design - a bridge that collapses, or an aeroplane that falls out of the sky. A quite specific task lies before us: to diagnose the blunders we have inherited from the Enlightenment, and put them right. So here, briefly, is the diagnosis. The philosophes of the 18th century assumed, understandably enough, that the proper way to implement the Enlightenment programme was to develop social science alongside natural science. Francis Bacon had already stressed the importance of improving knowledge of the natural world in order to achieve social progress. The philosophes generalized this, holding that it is just as important to improve knowledge of the social world. Thus the philosophes set about creating the social sciences: history, anthropology, political economy, psychology, sociology. This had an immense impact. Throughout the 19th century the diverse social sciences were developed, often by non-academics, in accordance with the Enlightenment idea. Gradually, universities took notice of these developments until, by the mid 20th century, all the diverse branches of the social sciences, as conceived of by the Enlightenment, were built into the institutional structure of universities as recognized academic disciplines. The outcome is what we have today, knowledge-inquiry as we may call it, a kind of inquiry devoted in the first instance to the pursuit of knowledge. But, from the standpoint of creating a kind of inquiry designed to help humanity learn how to become enlightened and civilized, which was the original idea, all this amounts to a series of monumental blunders. In order to implement properly the basic Enlightenment idea of learning from scientific progress how to achieve social progress towards a civilized world, it is essential to get the following three things right. 1. The progress-achieving methods of science need to be correctly identified. 2. These methods need to be correctly generalized so that they become fruitfully applicable to any worthwhile, problematic human endeavour, whatever the aims may be, and not just applicable to the one endeavour of acquiring knowledge. 3. The correctly generalized progress-achieving methods then need to be exploited correctly in the great human endeavour of trying to make social progress towards an enlightened, civilized world. Unfortunately, the philosophes of the Enlightenment got all three points wrong. They failed to capture correctly the progress-achieving methods of natural science; they failed to generalize these methods properly; and, most disastrously of all, they failed to apply them properly so that humanity might learn how to become civilized by rational means. Instead of seeking to apply the progress-achieving methods of science, after having been appropriately generalized, to the task of creating a better world, the philosophes applied scientific method to the task of creating social science. Instead of trying to make social progress towards an enlightened world, they set about making scientific progress in knowledge of social phenomena. That the philosophes made these blunders in the 18th century is forgivable; what is unforgivable is that these blunders still remain unrecognized and uncorrected today, over two centuries later. Instead of correcting the blunders, we have allowed our institutions of learning to be shaped by them as they have developed throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, so that now the blunders are an all-pervasive feature of our world. The Enlightenment, and what it led to, has long been criticized, by the Romantic movement, by what Isaiah Berlin has called 'the counter-Enlightenment', and more recently by the Frankfurt school, by postmodernists and others. But these standard objections are, from my point of view, entirely missing the point. In particular, my idea is the very opposite of all those anti-rationalist, romantic and postmodernist views which object to the way the Enlightenment gives far too great an importance to natural science and to scientific rationality. My discovery is that what is wrong with the traditional Enlightenment, and the kind of academic inquiry we now possess derived from it - knowledge-inquiry - is not too much 'scientific rationality' but, on the contrary, not enough. It is the glaring, wholesale irrationality of contemporary academic inquiry, when judged from the standpoint of helping humanity learn how to become more civilized, that is the problem. But, the cry will go up, wisdom has nothing to do with reason. And reason has nothing to do with wisdom. On the contrary! It is just such an item of conventional 'wisdom' that my great idea turns on its head. Once both reason and wisdom have been rightly understood, and the irrationality of academic inquiry as it exists at present has been appreciated, it becomes obvious that it is precisely reason that we need to put into practice in our personal, social, institutional and global lives if our lives, at all these levels, are to become imbued with a bit more wisdom. We need, in short, a new, more rigorous kind of inquiry which has, as its basic task, to seek and promote wisdom. We may call this new kind of inquiry wisdom-inquiry. But what is wisdom? This is how I define it in From Knowledge to Wisdom, a book published some years ago now, in 1984, in which I set out my 'great idea' in some detail: "[wisdom is] the desire, the active endeavour, and the capacity to discover and achieve what is desirable and of value in life, both for oneself and for others. Wisdom includes knowledge and understanding but goes beyond them in also including: the desire and active striving for what is of value, the ability to see what is of value, actually and potentially, in the circumstances of life, the ability to experience value, the capacity to use and develop knowledge, technology and understanding as needed for the realization of value. Wisdom, like knowledge, can be conceived of, not only personal terms, but also in institutional or social terms. We can thus interpret [wisdom-inquiry] as asserting: the basic task of rational inquiry is to help us develop wiser ways of living, wiser institutions, customs and social relations, a wiser world." (From Knowledge to Wisdom, p. 66.) What, then, are the three blunders of the Enlightenment, still built into the intellectual/institutional structure of academia? First, the philosophes failed to capture correctly the progress-achieving methods of natural science. From D'Alembert in the 18th century to Karl Popper in the 20th, the widely held view, amongst both scientists and philosophers, has been (and continues to be) that science proceeds by assessing theories impartially in the light of evidence, no permanent assumption being accepted by science about the universe independently of evidence. Preference may be given to simple, unified or explanatory theories, but not in such a way that nature herself is, in effect, assumed to be simple, unified or comprehensible. This orthodox view, which I call standard empiricism is, however, untenable. If taken literally, it would instantly bring science to a standstill. For, given any accepted fundamental theory of physics, T, Newtonian theory say, or quantum theory, endlessly many empirically more successful rivals can be concocted which agree with T about observed phenomena but disagree arbitrarily about some unobserved phenomena, and successfully predict phenomena, in an ad hoc way, that T makes false predictions about, or no predictions. Physics would be drowned in an ocean of such empirically more successful rival theories. In practice, these rivals are excluded because they are disastrously disunified. Two considerations govern acceptance of theories in physics: empirical success and unity. In demanding unity, we demand of a fundamental physical theory that it ascribes the same dynamical laws to the phenomena to which the theory applies. But in persistently accepting unified theories, to the extent of rejecting disunified rivals that are just as, or even more, empirically successful, physics makes a big persistent assumption about the universe. The universe is such that all disunified theories are false. It has some kind of unified dynamic structure. It is physically comprehensible in the sense that explanations for phenomena exist to be discovered. But this untestable (and thus metaphysical) assumption that the universe is physically comprehensible is profoundly problematic. Science is obliged to assume, but does not know, that the universe is comprehensible. Much less does it know that the universe is comprehensible in this or that way. A glance at the history of physics reveals that ideas have changed dramatically over time. In the 17th century there was the idea that the universe consists of corpuscles, minute billiard balls, which interact only by contact. This gave way to the idea that the universe consists of point-particles surrounded by rigid, spherically symmetrical fields of force, which in turn gave way to the idea that there is one unified self-interacting field, varying smoothly throughout space and time. Nowadays we have the idea that everything is made up of minute quantum strings embedded in ten or eleven dimensions of space-time. Some kind of assumption along these lines must be made but, given the historical record, and given that any such assumption concerns the ultimate nature of the universe, that of which we are most ignorant, it is only reasonable to conclude that it is almost bound to be false. The way to overcome this fundamental dilemma inherent in the scientific enterprise is to construe physics as making a hierarchy of metaphysical assumptions concerning the comprehensibility and knowability of the universe, these assumptions asserting less and less as one goes up the hierarchy, and thus becoming more and more likely to be true, and more nearly such that their truth is required for science, or the pursuit of knowledge, to be possible at all. In this way a framework of relatively insubstantial, unproblematic, fixed assumptions and associated methods is created within which much more substantial and problematic assumptions and associated methods can be changed, and indeed improved, as scientific knowledge improves. Put another way, a framework of relatively unspecific, unproblematic, fixed aims and methods is created within which much more specific and problematic aims and methods evolve as scientific knowledge evolves. There is positive feedback between improving knowledge, and improving aims-and-methods, improving knowledge-about-how-to-improve-knowledge. This is the nub of scientific rationality, the methodological key to the unprecedented success of science. Science adapts its nature to what it discovers about the nature of the universe. This hierarchical conception of physics, which I call aim-oriented empiricism, can readily be generalized to take into account problematic assumptions associated with the aims of science having to with values, and the social uses or applications of science. It can be generalized so as to apply to the different branches of natural science. Different sciences have different specific aims, and so different specific methods although, throughout natural science there is the common meta-methodology of aim-oriented empiricism. So much for the first blunder of the traditional Enlightenment, and how to put it right. [3] Second, having failed to identify the methods of science correctly, the philosophes naturally failed to generalize these methods properly. They failed to appreciate that the idea of representing the problematic aims (and associated methods) of science in the form of a hierarchy can be generalized and applied fruitfully to other worthwhile enterprises besides science. Many other enterprises have problematic aims - problematic because aims conflict, and because what we seek may be unrealizable, undesirable, or both. Such enterprises, with problematic aims, would benefit from employing a hierarchical methodology, generalized from that of science, thus making it possible to improve aims and methods as the enterprise proceeds. There is the hope that, as a result of exploiting in life methods generalized from those employed with such success in science, some of the astonishing success of science might be exported into other worthwhile human endeavours, with problematic aims quite different from those of science. Third, and most disastrously of all, the philosophes failed completely to try to apply such generalized, hierarchical progress-achieving methods to the immense, and profoundly problematic enterprise of making social progress towards an enlightened, wise world. The aim of such an enterprise is notoriously problematic. For all sorts of reasons, what constitutes a good world, an enlightened, wise or civilized world, attainable and genuinely desirable, must be inherently and permanently problematic. Here, above all, it is essential to employ the generalized version of the hierarchical, progress-achieving methods of science, designed specifically to facilitate progress when basic aims are problematic. It is just this that the philosophes failed to do. Instead of applying the hierarchical methodology to social life, the philosophes sought to apply a seriously defective conception of scientific method to social science, to the task of making progress towards, not a better world, but to better knowledge of social phenomena. And this ancient blunder, developed throughout the 19th century by J.S. Mill, Karl Marx and many others, and built into academia in the early 20th century with the creation of the diverse branches of the social sciences in universities all over the world, is still built into the institutional and intellectual structure of academia today, inherent in the current character of social science. Properly implemented, in short, the Enlightenment idea of learning from scientific progress how to achieve social progress towards an enlightened world would involve developing social inquiry, not primarily as social science, but rather as social methodology, or social philosophy. A basic task would be to get into personal and social life, and into other institutions besides that of science - into government, industry, agriculture, commerce, the media, law, education, international relations - hierarchical, progress-achieving methods (designed to improve problematic aims) arrived at by generalizing the methods of science. A basic task for academic inquiry as a whole would be to help humanity learn how to resolve its conflicts and problems of living in more just, cooperatively rational ways than at present. The fundamental intellectual and humanitarian aim of inquiry would be to help humanity acquire wisdom - wisdom being, as I have already indicated, the capacity to realize (apprehend and create) what is of value in life, for oneself and others. One outcome of getting into social and institutional life the kind of aim-evolving, hierarchical methodology indicated above, generalized from science, is that it becomes possible for us to develop and assess rival philosophies of life as a part of social life, somewhat as theories are developed and assessed within science. Such a hierarchical methodology provides a framework within which competing views about what our aims and methods in life should be - competing religious, political and moral views - may be cooperatively assessed and tested against broadly agreed, unspecific aims (high up in the hierarchy of aims) and the experience of personal and social life. There is the possibility of cooperatively and progressively improving such philosophies of life (views about what is of value in life and how it is to be achieved) much as theories are cooperatively and progressively improved in science. Wisdom-inquiry, because of its greater rigour, has intellectual standards that are, in important respects, different from those of knowledge-inquiry. Whereas knowledge-inquiry demands that emotions and desires, values, human ideals and aspirations, philosophies of life be excluded from the intellectual domain of inquiry, wisdom-inquiry requires that they be included. In order to discover what is of value in life it is essential that we attend to our feelings and desires. But not everything we desire is desirable, and not everything that feels good is good. Feelings, desires and values need to be subjected to critical scrutiny. And of course feelings, desires and values must not be permitted to influence judgements of factual truth and falsity. Wisdom-inquiry embodies a synthesis of traditional Rationalism and Romanticism. It includes elements from both, and it improves on both. It incorporates Romantic ideals of integrity, having to do with motivational and emotional honesty, honesty about desires and aims; and at the same time it incorporates traditional Rationalist ideals of integrity, having to do with respect for objective fact, knowledge, and valid argument. Traditional Rationalism takes its inspiration from science and method; Romanticism takes its inspiration from art, from imagination, and from passion. Wisdom-inquiry holds art to have a fundamental rational role in inquiry, in revealing what is of value, and unmasking false values; but science, too, is of fundamental importance. What we need, for wisdom, is an interplay of sceptical rationality and emotion, an interplay of mind and heart, so that we may develop mindful hearts and heartfelt minds (as I put it in my first book What's Wrong With Science?). It is time we healed the great rift in our culture, so graphically depicted by C. P. Snow. The revolution we require - intellectual, institutional and cultural - if it ever comes about, will be comparable in its long-term impact to that of the Renaissance, the scientific revolution, or the Enlightenment. The outcome will be traditions and institutions of learning rationally designed to help us realize what is of value in life. There are a few scattered signs that this intellectual revolution, from knowledge to wisdom, is already under way. It will need, however, much wider cooperative support - from scientists, scholars, students, research councils, university administrators, vice chancellors, teachers, the media and the general public - if it is to become anything more than what it is at present, a fragmentary and often impotent movement of protest and opposition, often at odds with itself, exercising little influence on the main body of academic work. I can hardly imagine any more important work for anyone associated with academia than, in teaching, learning and research, to help promote this revolution. Notes [1] What's Wrong With Science? (Bran's Head Books, 1976), From Knowledge to Wisdom (Blackwell, 1984; 2nd edition, Pentire Press, 2007), The Comprehensibility of the Universe (Oxford University Press, 1998, paperback 2003), and The Human World in the Physical Universe: Consciousness, Free Will and Evolution (Rowman and Littlefield, 2001), Is Science Neurotic? (Imperial College Press, 2004), Cutting God in Half - And Putting the Pieces Together Again (Pentire Press, 2010). For critical discussion see L. McHenry, ed., Science and the Pursuit of Wisdom: Studies in the Philosophy of Nicholas Maxwell (Ontos Verlag, 2009).

Back to text

[2] See, for example, "Science, Reason, Knowledge and Wisdom: A Critique of Specialism", Inquiry 23, 1980, pp. 19-81; "What Kind of Inquiry Can Best Help Us Create a Good World?", Science, Technology and Human Values 17, 1992, pp. 205-227; "What the Task of Creating Civilization has to Learn from the Success of Modern Science: Towards a New Enlightenment", Reflections on Higher Education 4, 1992, pp. 139-157; "Can Humanity Learn to Become Civilized? The Crisis of Science without Civilization", Journal of Applied Philosophy 17, 2000, pp. 29-44; "A new conception of science", Physics World 13, no. 8, 2000, pp. 17-18; "From Knowledge to Wisdom: The Need for an Academic Revolution", London Review of Education, 5, 2007, pp. 97-115, reprinted in. R. Barnett and N. Maxwell, eds., Wisdom in the University (Routledge, 2008, pp. 1-19) "Do We Need a Scientific Revolution?", Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry, vol. 8, no. 3, September 2008, pp. 95-105. All my articles are available online here .

[3] For further details see my The Comprehensibility of the Universe: A New Conception of Science, Oxford University Press, 1998; Is Science Neurotic?, Imperial College Press, 2004; and From Knowledge to Wisdom, especially chs. 5, 9, and 2nd ed., ch. 14. Back to text

Back to Top

• Join Friends of Wisdom

This is an association of people sympathetic to the idea that academic inquiry should help humanity acquire more wisdom by rational means. Wisdom is taken to be the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others. It includes knowledge, understanding and technological know-how, and much else besides. Friends of Wisdom try to encourage universities and schools actively to seek and promote wisdom by educational and intellectual means. At present, Friends of Wisdom communicate with one another in the main by email (JISCMAIL).

If you wish to join, click on the link below, and then click on "Subscribe" under "Options" on the LHS of the screen, and join:

or email: nick [at] knowledgetowisdom.org

• Friends of Wisdom Website .

© Copyright Nicholas Maxwell: All Rights Reserved

• Key Differences

Know the Differences & Comparisons

Difference Between Knowledge and Wisdom

Knowledge is the accumulation of information, learned through education or experience. On the other hand, wisdom is when you know how to apply your knowledge, for the benefit of others. Here, in this article, we’ve simplified the difference between knowledge and wisdom.

Content: Knowledge Vs Wisdom

Comparison chart.

Definition of Knowledge

The term ‘knowledge’ simply refers to the understanding or awareness, about a person, thing or subject, such as facts, skills, information, etc. It is the state of what you know about a particular topic. It is the familiarity with different objects, ways of doing things, places, cultures, events, facts, ideas, etc. It can be theoretical or practical proficiency gained over time through education or experience by learning, observing, researching, discussing, studying and so on.

Definition of Wisdom

Wisdom is a wider term than knowledge and intelligence. It is the quality of person to think, act or discern what is best, right, true and enduring. It is the application of common sense, knowledge and experience, at the right time, place, manner and situation so as to follow the best possible course of action. It develops the ability to judge and make beneficial and productive decisions in life.

Knowledge and understanding are the basis of wisdom, but the experience is the key to attaining wisdom. It unites knowledge and experience into insights and increases an individual’s understanding of relationships and meaning of life.

Key Differences Between Knowledge and Wisdom

The main differences between knowledge and wisdom are discussed in detail in the given below points:

• Knowledge refers to the collection of information and facts about something or someone by learning and experience. The ability of a person to judge, apply education & experience in practical life and make right choices is called wisdom.
• Knowledge is nothing but organised information. It is not about the plethora of information, but that should be relevant. On the contrary, wisdom is the quality to implement knowledge into practical life.
• Knowledge is selective in nature, in essence, it only stores specialised information. Conversely, wisdom is comprehensive and integrated.
• Knowledge is deterministic while wisdom is non-deterministic.
• Knowledge results in the understanding of the particular subject, whereas wisdom develops the discernment and reasoning ability in a person.
• The approach of knowledge is theoretical. In contrast to, wisdom which has a spiritual approach.
• When it comes to the acquisition, knowledge is acquired by obtaining information or learning about the facts by observation or education. As opposed to wisdom, which is developed in the person through the day to day experiences in life.
• Knowledge has the same relation to mind, like that of wisdom with soul.

After referring to the above points, it can be concluded that there is a difference between knowledge and wisdom, but they are connected concepts. Knowledge without wisdom is possible, but wisdom without knowledge is impossible.

While knowledge is limited, wisdom has no visible end. Knowledge can have positive or negative effects in the sense that it can be useful to people if they use in a right way, but can also harm others if they use that knowledge in a wrong direction. Unlike wisdom which has only positive results, because it is the implementation of knowledge with an active and benevolent attitude.

You Might Also Like:

muj ahed says

November 6, 2016 at 5:44 pm

Wowwww… Mam.. This was an awesome article.

Robert Turner says

March 23, 2019 at 2:34 am

Like the article and agree with its premise.

June 28, 2019 at 9:24 am

Awesome article

Rajesh Kumar says

July 12, 2019 at 7:49 am

Glory to Jesus .. The above explanation useful for when I was struggling to know the difference between knowledge and wisdom.. Thanks..

1 corinthians 12:8

For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; (KJV)

Mubo Obajana says

October 13, 2019 at 9:34 pm

Great truth communicated with simplicity

mathew says

October 1, 2019 at 4:54 pm

Good explanation , thanks

Vinny Bhakta says

April 26, 2020 at 12:17 am

Explained well

R.Baskaran says

November 10, 2020 at 10:23 am

simply superb

March 22, 2022 at 1:27 am

well written. Good job

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Knowledge vs. Wisdom

"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" —T.S. Eliot. Knowledge is gathered from learning and education, while most say that wisdom is gathered from day-to-day experiences and is a state of being wise. Knowledge is merely having clarity of facts and truths, while wisdom is the practical ability to make consistently good decisions in life.

Comparison chart

• Knowing or understanding something, especially about a particular subject
• Having awareness of facts and/or truths
• Something that can be known, information
• The state of being wise
• The ability to use knowledge and/or experience intelligently
• Capable of determining what is wise vs. what is unwise
• A saying, philosophy, or other advice that is considered wise

Knowledge is gained through learning facts. Someone who knows a lot about a certain subject, such as science or history, can be considered knowledgeable . Information found online or in books can help someone expand her knowledge on a topic.

Wisdom comes from observing experiences and learning from them in a way that affects future decisions and behavior; it is the capacity to see the truth of a matter, in spite of any illusions or distractions. For example, someone might spend beyond his means and end up in unnecessary debt, but if he is wise this will only ever happen to him once, as he will have learned from his mistake; in the future, he will save his money before he spends it carelessly. An even wiser person might avoid such a mistake altogether by listening to the wisdom of others or by wisely choosing to seek information (knowledge) on how to properly manage finances.

Oftentimes, wisdom is passed down in cultures in the form of common sayings, philosophical phrases, and quotes, such as aphorisms and proverbs . (One popular English proverb, for example, is "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.") However, whether such wisdom is absorbed, believed, and applied depends on the individual.

How Time Affects Knowledge and Wisdom

Both knowledge and wisdom are said to increase over time, as in a person knows more at 20 than he did at 10, or is wiser at 50 than she was at 25. However, time has a more direct correlation with knowledge than with wisdom.

It is commonly accepted that a person who spends 20 years studying a topic knows more than someone who has spent only 5 years on the same subject matter. Experiences over time are also a key factor when it comes to wisdom, but the correlation is not so direct. In general, more time equals more knowledge, but more time doesn't guarantee wisdom; someone may very well make the same mistake at 60 that he did at 20. The reason for this is that knowledge is often a passive acquisition of data or facts, whereas wisdom requires the additional steps of applying judgment and drawing conclusions or changing behavior accordingly.

Time can also affect knowledge and wisdom in a negative way, as facts and data can change over time or be forgotten. Wisdom tends to be less negatively affected, though, for once a person is seen as "wise," they are generally regarded as such indefinitely. However, as wisdom is subjective and context-based, changing times can result in being "out of touch" with the times. For example, in the past, the wise solution to an unwanted pregnancy was a quick marriage, whereas in modern times, a wise solution may entail abortion, adoption, or embracing single parenthood.

Correlation

Wisdom and knowledge are linked. Wisdom is enhanced by knowledge and the ability to acquire knowledge effectively. But wisdom is also the ability to use knowledge in a practical and productive manner. Knowledge is often considered to be "externally generated," meaning that it comes primarily from outside sources, such as books, classroom lectures, videos, etc. On the other hand, wisdom is deemed to come primarily from "internal sources," meaning one's own introspective thinking, analysis, and judgment. Wisdom cannot be acquired and applied without knowledge, but knowledge isn't necessarily guided or enhanced by wisdom.

Applying Knowledge and Wisdom

The application of knowledge is often a matter of finding or knowing the right facts, meaning that there is a distinct difference between the "right" and "wrong" facts. In contrast, wisdom often requires much more than facts to perceive and choose the "right" action or to avoid the "wrong" action. The factors involved may include speculation, feelings, and moral or ethical values . In this general sense, applying knowledge tends to be a much simpler process.

An example of applying knowledge can be found in the development of nuclear bombs, which were the end result of thousands or perhaps millions of steps. Following this development, the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is sometimes understood as being wise, under the notion that these acts shortened World War II and thus saved thousands or even millions of lives. In terms of knowledge, the end result (the atom bomb being made) is obvious, but in terms of whether applying that knowledge was wise or not is still unclear and subject to intense debate.

• Knowledge Meaning - Wiktionary
• Wisdom Meaning - Wiktionary

Related Comparisons

Share this comparison via:

If you read this far, you should follow us:

"Knowledge vs Wisdom." Diffen.com. Diffen LLC, n.d. Web. 9 Aug 2024. < >

Comments: Knowledge vs Wisdom

Anonymous comments (5).

November 16, 2010, 11:54am ..the information above help me alot about my assignment in philosophy.. — 112.✗.✗.86

October 26, 2011, 6:25pm I was seeking knowledge and left site with a greater wisdom. — 146.✗.✗.104

December 3, 2009, 11:12am Those written is really beneficial.I've been benefited.I've done my assignment easily.Thanks a lot.Hope their would be much more word comparison that will be stored in this web site.:-) — 120.✗.✗.21

February 25, 2014, 11:48am so first up for me is knowledge and lets see about the rest later. Good One.How to make fire? KnowledgeWhat to do with fire? WisdomHope you will get to know how to make fire and most iltorpantmy, how to use it wise. — 84.✗.✗.122

April 16, 2013, 12:17pm by knowing 3+3=6 knowledge ll increase,,but by telling 3+3=5 wisdom wont decrease..wisdom understands the wisdom and also understands the foolish — 117.✗.✗.82

• Ethics vs Morals
• Data vs Information
• Happiness vs Joy
• Subjective vs Objective
• Empathy vs Sympathy
• Goal vs Objective
• Avenge vs Revenge

Edit or create new comparisons in your area of expertise.

Stay connected

© All rights reserved.

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell [Summary, analysis, Main Ideas]

In his essay "Knowledge and Wisdom," Bertrand Russell emphasizes the importance of wisdom and adds that, in the absence of it, knowledge can be dangerous. Russell advocates that wisdom and knowledge should go hand in hand to use knowledge rationally. Wisdom, according to the essayist, allows us to put our knowledge to good use in the real world without causing harm to others.

{getToc} $title={Table of Contents}

Knowledge and Wisdom Bertrand Russell [Summary, analysis, Main Ideas]

In the essay, Russell lists many methods for obtaining wisdom and bemoans the fact that, despite tremendous information, there has been no equivalent rise in wisdom. Bertrand Russell discusses several factors that contribute to wisdom in his essay "Knowledge and Wisdom." According to him, a sense of proportion, comprehensiveness with broad feeling, emancipation from personal prejudices and the tyranny of sensory perception, impartiality, and awareness of human needs and understanding are all factors that contribute to wisdom. Wisdom is gained when a person’s thoughts and feelings become less personal.

The key to wisdom is being able to detach ourselves from the control of our sense organs. Our ego grows as a result of our senses. Once we can control our sense organs, we start to think about other people’s convenience. As a result, we stop thinking of ourselves as individuals. We become wise when we begin to think about other people. We give up our egoism. It’s tough to eliminate selfishness, yet we can think about things that aren’t in our immediate vicinity. Wisdom emerges when we begin to value things that do not directly affect us. When we love people, we gain wisdom. The writer urges people not to hate anyone.

In the essay, Russell mentioned how knowledge without wisdom can be dangerous, giving the example of scientists and historians. Scientists develop novel drugs but have no idea how these medicines will affect people’s lives. Drugs may help lower the infant mortality rate. However, it may result in a rise in population, and the world is sure to face the consequences of the rise in population. Once, Hegel, the greatest historian, wrote with historical knowledge and made the Germans believe they were a master race, and this false sense of pride drove them to war. When an intellectual uses his knowledge to demonstrate his theory or principles without considering the feelings or outcomes of such ideas, he may do more harm than good.

The author is assured that wisdom must be an integral part of education because a person can be well educated but lack the wisdom to understand the true meaning of life. Wisdom is required in education because knowledge alone leads to its misuse. After all, one cannot see the true purpose of life. Wisdom, according to Russell, should be taught as a goal of education.

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell [Main ideas]

➤Wisdom is lacking in men who have knowledge but no sentiments.

➤ Wisdom should be coupled with humanity’s overall needs.

➤ Wisdom should be linked to a basic understanding of life’s purpose.

➤ Wisdom is required in both public and private life.

➤ Wisdom is required in personal life to avoid dislike for one another.

➤ The key to wisdom is being able to detach ourselves from the control of our sense organs.

➤ Wisdom appears when we begin to value things that do not directly affect us.

➤ Knowledge without wisdom has the potential to be dangerous and harmful to humans.

➤ The essence of wisdom is to free oneself from the captivity of the physical and emotional worlds and look beyond.

➤ Wisdom can be learnt by loving others and letting go of selfishness.

➤ Knowledge and wisdom can be combined in an educational scheme.

➤ Wisdom must be an integral part of education because a man or person can be well-educated but lack the wisdom to understand the true meaning of life.

➤ Wisdom should be taught in school alongside knowledge

➤ Lone technical knowledge can be harmful to humans if applied without caution.

➤ Knowledge combined with wisdom is beneficial to people because it addresses all of humanity’s needs .

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell Class 12 Exercise and Question Answer

Understanding the text 

Answer the following questions.

Reference to the context

Difference between Knowledge and Wisdom

Post a Comment

Contact form.

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

What is wisdom? Philosophers, psychologists, spiritual leaders, poets, novelists, life coaches, and a variety of other important thinkers have tried to understand the concept of wisdom. This entry will provide a brief and general overview, and analysis of, several philosophical views on the topic of wisdom. It is not intended to capture the many interesting and important approaches to wisdom found in other fields of inquiry. Moreover, this entry will focus on several major ideas in the Western philosophical tradition. In particular, it will focus on five general approaches to understanding what it takes to be wise: (1) wisdom as epistemic humility, (2) wisdom as epistemic accuracy, (3) wisdom as knowledge, (4) a hybrid theory of wisdom, and (5) wisdom as rationality.

1. Wisdom as Epistemic Humility

2. wisdom as epistemic accuracy, 3. wisdom as knowledge, 4. hybrid theory, 5. wisdom as rationality, other internet resources, related entries.

Socrates’ view of wisdom, as expressed by Plato in The Apology (20e-23c), is sometimes interpreted as an example of a humility theory of wisdom (see, for example, Ryan 1996 and Whitcomb, 2010). In Plato’s Apology , Socrates and his friend Chaerephon visit the oracle at Delphi. As the story goes, Chaerephon asks the oracle whether anyone is wiser than Socrates. The oracle’s answer is that Socrates is the wisest person. Socrates reports that he is puzzled by this answer since so many other people in the community are well known for their extensive knowledge and wisdom, and yet Socrates claims that he lacks knowledge and wisdom. Socrates does an investigation to get to the bottom of this puzzle. He interrogates a series of politicians, poets, and craftsmen. As one would expect, Socrates’ investigation reveals that those who claim to have knowledge either do not really know any of the things they claim to know, or else know far less than they proclaim to know. The most knowledgeable of the bunch, the craftsmen, know about their craft, but they claim to know things far beyond the scope of their expertise. Socrates, so we are told, neither suffers the vice of claiming to know things he does not know, nor the vice of claiming to have wisdom when he does not have wisdom. In this revelation, we have a potential resolution to the wisdom puzzle in The Apology .

Although the story may initially appear to deliver a clear theory of wisdom, it is actually quite difficult to capture a textually accurate and plausible theory here. One interpretation is that Socrates is wise because he, unlike the others, believes he is not wise, whereas the poets, politicians, and craftsmen arrogantly and falsely believe they are wise. This theory, which will be labeled Humility Theory 1 (H1), is simply (see, for example, Lehrer & Smith 1996, 3):

Humility Theory 1 (H1) : S is wise iff S believes s/he is not wise.

This is a tempting and popular interpretation because Socrates certainly thinks he has shown that the epistemically arrogant poets, politicians, and craftsmen lack wisdom. Moreover, Socrates claims that he is not wise, and yet, if we trust the oracle, Socrates is actually wise.

Upon careful inspection, (H1) is not a reasonable interpretation of Socrates’ view. Although Socrates does not boast of his own wisdom, he does believe the oracle. If he was convinced that he was not wise, he would have rejected the oracle and gone about his business because he would not find any puzzle to unravel. Clearly, he believes, on some level, that he is wise. The mystery is: what is wisdom if he has it and the others lack it? Socrates nowhere suggests that he has become unwise after believing the oracle. Thus, (H1) is not an acceptable interpretation of Socrates’ view.

Moreover, (H1) is false. Many people are clear counterexamples to (H1). Many people who believe they are not wise are correct in their self-assessment. Thus, the belief that one is not wise is not a sufficient condition for wisdom. Furthermore, it seems that the belief that one is not wise is not necessary for wisdom. It seems plausible to think that a wise person could be wise enough to realize that she is wise. Too much modesty might get in the way of making good decisions and sharing what one knows. If one thinks Socrates was a wise person, and if one accepts that Socrates did, in fact, accept that he was wise, then Socrates himself is a counterexample to (H1). The belief that one is wise could be a perfectly well justified belief for a wise person. Having the belief that one is wise does not, in itself, eliminate the possibility that the person is wise. Nor does it guarantee the vice of arrogance. We should hope that a wise person would have a healthy dose of epistemic self-confidence, appreciate that she is wise, and share her understanding of reality with the rest of us who could benefit from her wisdom. Thus, the belief that one is not wise is not required for wisdom.

(H1) focused on believing one is not wise. Another version of the humility theory is worth considering. When Socrates demonstrates that a person is not wise, he does so by showing that the person lacks some knowledge that he or she claims to possess. Thus, one might think that Socrates’ view could be better captured by focusing on the idea that wise people believe they lack knowledge (rather than lacking wisdom). That is, one might consider the following view:

Humility Theory 2 (H2): S is wise iff S believes S does not know anything.

Unfortunately, this interpretation is not any better than (H1). It falls prey to problems similar to those that refuted (H1) both as an interpretation of Socrates, and as an acceptable account of wisdom. Moreover, remember that Socrates admits that the craftsmen do have some knowledge. Socrates might have considered them to be wise if they had restricted their confidence and claims to knowledge to what they actually did know about their craft. Their problem was that they professed to have knowledge beyond their area of expertise. The problem was not that they claimed to have knowledge.

Before turning to alternative approaches to wisdom, it is worth mentioning another interpretation of Socrates that fits with the general spirit of epistemic humility. One might think that what Socrates is establishing is that his wisdom is found in his realization that human wisdom is not a particularly valuable kind of wisdom. Only the gods possess the kind of wisdom that is truly valuable. This is clearly one of Socrates’ insights, but it does not provide us with an understanding of the nature of wisdom. It tells us only of its comparative value. Merely understanding this evaluative insight would not, for reasons similar to those discussed with (HP1) and (HP2), make one wise.

Humility theories of wisdom are not promising, but they do, perhaps, provide us with some important character traits associated with wise people. Wise people, one might argue, possess epistemic self-confidence, yet lack epistemic arrogance. Wise people tend to acknowledge their fallibility, and wise people are reflective, introspective, and tolerant of uncertainty. Any acceptable theory of wisdom ought to be compatible with such traits. However, those traits are not, in and of themselves, definitive of wisdom.

Socrates can be interpreted as providing an epistemic accuracy, rather than an epistemic humility, theory of wisdom. The poets, politicians, and craftsmen all believe they have knowledge about topics on which they are considerably ignorant. Socrates, one might argue, believes he has knowledge when, and only when, he really does have knowledge. Perhaps wise people restrict their confidence to propositions for which they have knowledge or, at least, to propositions for which they have excellent justification. Perhaps Socrates is better interpreted as having held an Epistemic Accuracy Theory such as:

Epistemic Accuracy Theory 1 (EA1) : S is wise iff for all p , ( S believes S knows p iff S knows p .)

According to (EA1), a wise person is accurate about what she knows and what she does not know. If she really knows p , she believes she knows p . And, if she believes she knows p , then she really does know p . (EA1) is consistent with the idea that Socrates accepts that he is wise and with the idea that Socrates does have some knowledge. (EA1) is a plausible interpretation of the view Socrates endorses, but it is not a plausible answer in the search for an understanding of wisdom. Wise people can make mistakes about what they know. Socrates, Maimonides, King Solomon, Einstein, Goethe, Gandhi, and every other candidate for the honor of wisdom have held false beliefs about what they did and did not know. It is easy to imagine a wise person being justified in believing she possesses knowledge about some claim, and also easy to imagine that she could be shown to be mistaken, perhaps long after her death. If (EA1) is true, then just because a person believes she has knowledge when she does not, she is not wise. That seems wrong. It is hard to imagine that anyone at all is, or ever has been, wise if (EA1) is correct.

We could revise the Epistemic Accuracy Theory to get around this problem. We might only require that a wise person’s belief is highly justified when she believes she has knowledge. That excuses people with bad epistemic luck.

Epistemic Accuracy 2 (EA2) : S is wise iff for all p , ( S believes S knows p iff S ’s belief in p is highly justified.)

(EA2) gets around the problem with (EA1). The Socratic Method challenges one to produce reasons for one’s view. When Socrates’ interlocutor is left dumbfounded, or reduced to absurdity, Socrates rests his case. One might argue that through his questioning, Socrates reveals not that his opponents lack knowledge because their beliefs are false, but he demonstrates that his opponents are not justified in holding the views they profess to know. Since the craftsmen, poets, and politicians questioned by Socrates all fail his interrogation, they were shown, one might argue, to have claimed to have knowledge when their beliefs were not even justified.

Many philosophers would hesitate to endorse this interpretation of what is going on in The Apology . They would argue that a failure to defend one’s beliefs from Socrates’ relentless questioning does not show that a person is not justified in believing a proposition. Many philosophers would argue that having very good evidence, or forming a belief via a reliable process, would be sufficient for justification.

Proving, or demonstrating to an interrogator, that one is justified is another matter, and not necessary for simply being justified. Socrates, some might argue, shows only that the craftsmen, poets, and politicians cannot defend themselves from his questions. He does not show, one might argue, that the poets, politicians, and craftsmen have unjustified beliefs. Since we gain very little insight into the details of the conversation in this dialogue, it would be unfair to dismiss this interpretation on these grounds. Perhaps Socrates did show, through his intense questioning, that the craftsmen, poets, and politicians formed and held their beliefs without adequate evidence or formed and held them through unreliable belief forming processes. Socrates only reports that they did not know all that they professed to know. Since we do not get to witness the actual questioning as we do in Plato’s other dialogues, we should not reject (EA2) as an interpretation of Socrates’ view of wisdom in The Apology .

Regardless of whether (EA2) is Socrates’ view, there are problems for (EA2) as an account of what it means to be wise. Even if (EA2) is exactly what Socrates meant, some philosophers would argue that one could be justified in believing a proposition, but not realize that she is justified. If that is a possible situation for a wise person to be in, then she might be justified, but fail to believe she has knowledge. Could a wise person be in such a situation, or is it necessary that a wise person would always recognize the epistemic value of what he or she believes? [ 1 ] If this situation is impossible, then this criticism could be avoided. There is no need to resolve this issue here because (EA1) and (EA2) fall prey to another, much less philosophically thorny and controversial problem.

(EA1) and (EA2) suffer from a similar, and very serious, problem. Imagine a person who has very little knowledge. Suppose further, that the few things she does know are of little or no importance. She could be the sort of person that nobody would ever go to for information or advice. Such a person could be very cautious and believe that she knows only what she actually knows. Although she would have accurate beliefs about what she does and does not know, she would not be wise. This shows that (EA1) is flawed. As for (EA2), imagine that she believes she knows only what she is actually justified in believing. She is still not wise. It should be noted, however, that although accuracy theories do not provide an adequate account of wisdom, they reveal an important insight. Perhaps a necessary condition for being wise is that wise people think they have knowledge only when their beliefs are highly justified. Or, even more simply, perhaps wise people have epistemically justified, or rational, beliefs.

An alternative approach to wisdom focuses on the more positive idea that wise people are very knowledgeable people. There are many views in the historical and contemporary philosophical literature on wisdom that have knowledge, as opposed to humility or accuracy, as at least a necessary condition of wisdom. Aristotle ( Nichomachean Ethics VI, ch. 7), Descartes ( Principles of Philosophy ), Richard Garrett (1996), John Kekes (1983), Keith Lehrer & Nicholas Smith (1996), Robert Nozick (1989), Plato ( The Republic ), Sharon Ryan (1996, 1999), Valerie Tiberius (2008), Dennis Whitcomb (2010) and Linda Zagzebski (1996) for example, have all defended theories of wisdom that require a wise person to have knowledge of some sort. All of these views very clearly distinguish knowledge from expertise on a particular subject. Moreover, all of these views maintain that wise people know “what is important.” The views differ, for the most part, over what it is important for a wise person to know, and on whether there is any behavior, action, or way of living, that is required for wisdom.

Aristotle distinguished between two different kinds of wisdom, theoretical wisdom and practical wisdom. Theoretical wisdom is, according to Aristotle, “scientific knowledge, combined with intuitive reason, of the things that are highest by nature” ( Nicomachean Ethics , VI, 1141b). For Aristotle, theoretical wisdom involves knowledge of necessary, scientific, first principles and propositions that can be logically deduced from them. Aristotle’s idea that scientific knowledge is knowledge of necessary truths and their logical consequences is no longer a widely accepted view. Thus, for the purposes of this discussion, I will consider a theory that reflects the spirit of Aristotle’s view on theoretical wisdom, but without the controversy about the necessary or contingent nature of scientific knowledge. Moreover, it will combine scientific knowledge with other kinds of factual knowledge, including knowledge about history, philosophy, music, literature, mathematics, etc. Consider the following, knowledge based, theory of wisdom:

Wisdom as Extensive Factual Knowledge (WFK) : S is wise iff S has extensive factual knowledge about science, history, philosophy, literature, music, etc.

According to (WFK), a wise person is a person who knows a lot about the universe and our place in it. She would have extensive knowledge about the standard academic subjects. There are many positive things to say about (WFK). (WFK) nicely distinguishes between narrow expertise and knowledge of the mundane, from the important, broad, and general kind of knowledge possessed by wise people. As Aristotle puts it, “…we think that some people are wise in general, not in some particular field or in any other limited respect…” ( Nicomachean Ethics , Book 6, 1141a).

The main problem for (WFK) is that some of the most knowledgeable people are not wise. Although they have an abundance of very important factual knowledge, they lack the kind of practical know-how that is a mark of a wise person. Wise people know how to get on in the world in all kinds of situations and with all kinds of people. Extensive factual knowledge is not enough to give us what a wise person knows. As Robert Nozick points out, “Wisdom is not just knowing fundamental truths, if these are unconnected with the guidance of life or with a perspective on its meaning” (1989, 269). There is more to wisdom than intelligence and knowledge of science and philosophy or any other subject matter. Aristotle is well aware of the limitations of what he calls theoretical wisdom. However, rather than making improvements to something like (WFK), Aristotle distinguishes it as one kind of wisdom. Other philosophers would be willing to abandon (WFK), that is, claim that it provides insufficient conditions for wisdom, and add on what is missing.

Aristotle has a concept of practical wisdom that makes up for what is missing in theoretical wisdom. In Book VI of the Nicomachean Ethics , he claims, “This is why we say Anaxagoras, Thales, and men like them have philosophic but not practical wisdom, when we see them ignorant of what is to their own advantage, and why we say that they know things that are remarkable, admirable, difficult, and divine, but useless; viz. because it is not human goods they seek” (1141a). Knowledge of contingent facts that are useful to living well is required in Aristotle’s practical wisdom. According to Aristotle, “Now it is thought to be the mark of a man of practical wisdom to be able to deliberate well about what is good and expedient for himself, not in some particular respect, e.g. about what sorts of thing conduce to health or to strength, but about what sorts of thing conduce to the good life in general” ( Nichomachean Ethics , VI, 1140a–1140b). Thus, for Aristotle, practical wisdom requires knowing, in general, how to live well. Many philosophers agree with Aristotle on this point. However, many would not be satisfied with the conclusion that theoretical wisdom is one kind of wisdom and practical wisdom another. Other philosophers, including Linda Zagzebski (1996), agree that there are these two types of wisdom that ought to be distinguished.

Let’s proceed, without argument, on the assumption that it is possible to have a theory of one, general, kind of wisdom. Wisdom, in general, many philosophers would argue, requires practical knowledge about living. What Aristotle calls theoretical wisdom, many would contend, is not wisdom at all. Aristotle’s theoretical wisdom is merely extensive knowledge or deep understanding. Nicholas Maxwell (1984), in his argument to revolutionize education, argues that we should be teaching for wisdom, which he sharply distinguishes from standard academic knowledge. Similar points are raised by Robert Sternberg (2001) and Andrew Norman (1996). Robert Nozick holds a view very similar to Aristotle’s theory of practical wisdom, but Nozick is trying to capture the essence of wisdom, period. He is not trying to define one, alternative, kind of wisdom. Nozick claims, “Wisdom is what you need to understand in order to live well and cope with the central problems and avoid the dangers in the predicaments human beings find themselves in” (1989, 267). And, John Kekes maintains that, “What a wise man knows, therefore, is how to construct a pattern that, given the human situation, is likely to lead to a good life” (1983, 280). More recently, Valerie Tiberius (2008) has developed a practical view that connects wisdom with well being, requiring, among other things, that a wise person live the sort of life that he or she could sincerely endorse upon reflection. Such practical views of wisdom could be expressed, generally, as follows.

Wisdom as Knowing How To Live Well (KLW) : S is wise iff S knows how to live well.

This view captures Aristotle’s basic idea of practical wisdom. It also captures an important aspect of views defended by Nozick, Plato, Garrett, Kekes, Maxwell, Ryan, and Tiberius. Although giving an account of what it means to know how to live well may prove as difficult a topic as providing an account of wisdom, Nozick provides a very illuminating start.

Wisdom is not just one type of knowledge, but diverse. What a wise person needs to know and understand constitutes a varied list: the most important goals and values of life – the ultimate goal, if there is one; what means will reach these goals without too great a cost; what kinds of dangers threaten the achieving of these goals; how to recognize and avoid or minimize these dangers; what different types of human beings are like in their actions and motives (as this presents dangers or opportunities); what is not possible or feasible to achieve (or avoid); how to tell what is appropriate when; knowing when certain goals are sufficiently achieved; what limitations are unavoidable and how to accept them; how to improve oneself and one’s relationships with others or society; knowing what the true and unapparent value of various things is; when to take a long-term view; knowing the variety and obduracy of facts, institutions, and human nature; understanding what one’s real motives are; how to cope and deal with the major tragedies and dilemmas of life, and with the major good things too. (1989, 269)

With Nozick’s explanation of what one must know in order to live well, we have an interesting and quite attractive, albeit somewhat rough, theory of wisdom. As noted above, many philosophers, including Aristotle and Zagzebski would, however, reject (KLW) as the full story on wisdom. Aristotle and Zagzebski would obviously reject (KLW) as the full story because they believe theoretical wisdom is another kind of wisdom, and are unwilling to accept that there is a conception of one, general, kind of wisdom. Kekes claims, “The possession of wisdom shows itself in reliable, sound, reasonable, in a word, good judgment. In good judgment, a person brings his knowledge to bear on his actions. To understand wisdom, we have to understand its connection with knowledge, action, and judgment” (1983, 277). Kekes adds, “Wisdom ought also to show in the man who has it” (1983, 281). Many philosophers, therefore, think that wisdom is not restricted even to knowledge about how to live well. Tiberius thinks the wise person’s actions reflect their basic values. These philosophers believe that being wise also includes action. A person could satisfy the conditions of any of the principles we have considered thus far and nevertheless behave in a wildly reckless manner. Wildly reckless people are, even if very knowledgeable about life, not wise.

Philosophers who are attracted to the idea that knowing how to live well is a necessary condition for wisdom might want to simply tack on a success condition to (KLW) to get around cases in which a person knows all about living well, yet fails to put this knowledge into practice. Something along the lines of the following theory would capture this idea.

Wisdom as Knowing How To, and Succeeding at, Living Well (KLS) : S is wise iff (i) S knows how to live well, and (ii) S is successful at living well.

The idea of the success condition is that one puts one’s knowledge into practice. Or, rather than using the terminology of success, one might require that a wise person’s beliefs and values cohere with one’s actions (Tiberius, 2008). The main idea is that one’s actions are reflective of one’s understanding of what it means to live well. A view along the lines of (KLS) would be embraced by Aristotle and Zagzebski (for practical wisdom), and by Kekes, Nozick, and Tiberius. (KLS) would not be universally embraced, however (see Ryan 1999, for further criticisms). One criticism of (KLS) is that one might think that all the factual knowledge required by (WFK) is missing from this theory. One might argue that (WFK), the view that a wise person has extensive factual knowledge, was rejected only because it did not provide sufficient conditions for wisdom. Many philosophers would claim that (WFK) does provide a necessary condition for wisdom. A wise person, such a critic would argue, needs to know how to live well (as described by Nozick), but she also needs to have some deep and far-reaching theoretical, or factual, knowledge that may have very little impact on her daily life, practical decisions, or well being. In the preface of his Principles of Philosophy , Descartes insisted upon factual knowledge as an important component of wisdom. Descartes wrote, “It is really only God alone who has Perfect Wisdom, that is to say, who has a complete knowledge of the truth of all things; but it may be said that men have more wisdom or less according as they have more or less knowledge of the most important truths” ( Principles , 204). Of course, among those important truths, one might claim, are truths about living well, as well as knowledge in the basic academic subject areas.

Moreover, one might complain that the insight left standing from Epistemic Accuracy theories is also missing from (KLS). One might think that a wise person not only knows a lot, and succeeds at living well, she also confines her claims to knowledge (or belief that she has knowledge) to those propositions that she is justified in believing.

One way to try to accommodate the various insights from the theories considered thus far is in the form of a hybrid theory. One such idea is:

S is wise iff S has extensive factual and theoretical knowledge. S knows how to live well. S is successful at living well. S has very few unjustified beliefs.

Although this Hybrid Theory has a lot going for it, there are a number of important criticisms to consider. Dennis Whitcomb (2010) objects to all theories of wisdom that include a living well condition, or an appreciation of living well condition. He gives several interesting objections against such views. Whitcomb thinks that a person who is deeply depressed and totally devoid of any ambition for living well could nevertheless be wise. As long as such a person is deeply knowledgeable about academic subjects and knows how to live well, that person would have all they need for wisdom. With respect to a very knowledgeable and deeply depressed person with no ambition but to stay in his room, he claims, “If I ran across such a person, I would take his advice to heart, wish him a return to health, and leave the continuing search for sages to his less grateful advisees. And I would think he was wise despite his depression-induced failure to value or desire the good life. So I think that wisdom does not require valuing or desiring the good life.”

In response to Whitcomb’s penetrating criticism, one could argue that a deeply depressed person who is wise, would still live as well as she can, and would still value living well, even if she falls far short of perfection. Such a person would attempt to get help to deal with her depression. If she really does not care at all, she may be very knowledgeable, but she is not wise. There is something irrational about knowing how to live well and refusing to try to do so. Such irrationality is not compatible with wisdom. A person with this internal conflict may be extremely clever and shrewd, one to listen to on many issues, one to trust on many issues, and may even win a Nobel Prize for her intellectual greatness, but she is not admirable enough, and rationally consistent enough, to be wise. Wisdom is a virtue and a way of living, and it requires more than smart ideas and knowledge.

Aristotle held that “it is evident that it is impossible to be practically wise without being good” ( Nicomachean Ethics , 1144a, 36–37). Most of the philosophers mentioned thus far would include moral virtue in their understanding of what it means to live well. However, Whitcomb challenges any theory of wisdom that requires moral virtue. Whitcomb contends that a deeply evil person could nevertheless be wise.

Again, it is important to contrast being wise from being clever and intelligent. If we think of wisdom as the highest, or among the highest, of human virtues, then it seems incompatible with a deeply evil personality.

There is, however, a very serious problem with the Hybrid Theory. Since so much of what was long ago considered knowledge has been abandoned, or has evolved, a theory that requires truth (through a knowledge condition) would exclude almost all people who are now long dead, including Hypatia, Socrates, Confucius, Aristotle, Homer, Lao Tzu, etc. from the list of the wise. Bad epistemic luck, and having lived in the past, should not count against being wise. But, since truth is a necessary condition for knowledge, bad epistemic luck is sufficient to undermine a claim to knowledge. What matters, as far as being wise goes, is not that a wise person has knowledge, but that she has highly justified and rational beliefs about a wide variety of subjects, including how to live well, science, philosophy, mathematics, history, geography, art, literature, psychology, and so on. And the wider the variety of interesting topics, the better. Another way of developing this same point is to imagine a person with highly justified beliefs about a wide variety of subjects, but who is unaware that she is trapped in the Matrix, or some other skeptical scenario. Such a person could be wise even if she is sorely lacking knowledge. A theory of wisdom that focuses on having rational or epistemically justified beliefs, rather than the higher standard of actually having knowledge, would be more promising. Moreover, such a theory would incorporate much of what is attractive about epistemic humility, and epistemic accuracy, theories.

The final theory to be considered here is an attempt to capture all that is good, while avoiding all the serious problems of the other theories discussed thus far. Perhaps wisdom is a deep and comprehensive kind of rationality (Ryan, 2012).

Deep Rationality Theory (DRT): S is wise iff S has a wide variety of epistemically justified beliefs on a wide variety of valuable academic subjects. S has a wide variety of justified beliefs on how to live rationally (epistemically, morally, and practically). S is committed to living rationally. S has very few unjustified beliefs and is sensitive to her limitations.

In condition (1), DRT takes account of what is attractive about some knowledge theories by requiring epistemically justified beliefs about a wide variety of standard academic subjects. Condition (2) takes account of what is attractive about theories that require knowledge about how to live well. For example, having justified beliefs about how to live in a practically rational way would include having a well-reasoned strategy for dealing with the practical aspects of life. Having a rational plan does not require perfect success. It requires having good reasons behind one’s actions, responding appropriately to, and learning from, one’s mistakes, and having a rational plan for all sorts of situations and problems. Having justified beliefs about how to live in a morally rational way would not involve being a moral saint, but would require that one has good reasons supporting her beliefs about what is morally right and wrong, and about what one morally ought and ought not do in a wide variety of circumstances. Having justified beliefs about living in an emotionally rational way would involve, not dispassion, but having justified beliefs about what is, and what is not, an emotionally rational response to a situation. For example, it is appropriate to feel deeply sad when dealing with the loss of a loved one. But, ordinarily, feeling deeply sad or extremely angry is not an appropriate emotion to spilled milk. A wise person would have rational beliefs about the emotional needs and behaviors of other people.

Condition (3) ensures that the wise person live a life that reflects what she or he is justified in believing is a rational way to live. In condition (4), DRT respects epistemic humility. Condition (4) requires that a wise person not believe things without epistemic justification. The Deep Rationality Theory rules out all of the unwise poets, politicians, and craftsmen that were ruled out by Socrates. Wise people do not think they know when they lack sufficient evidence. Moreover, wise people are not epistemically arrogant.

The Deep Rationality Theory does not require knowledge or perfection. But it does require rationality, and it accommodates degrees of wisdom. It is a promising theory of wisdom.

• Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics , in The Basic Works of Aristotle , Richard McKeon, New York: Random House, 1941, pp. 935–1112.
• Garrett, R., 1996, “Three Definitions of Wisdom,” in Lehrer et al . 1996, pp. 221–232.
• Descartes, R., Meditations on First Philosophy , in The Philosophical Works of Descartes , Volume 1, E. Haldane and G. Ross (trans. and eds.), London: Cambridge University Press, 1979, pp. 131–199
• Descartes, R., Principles of Philosophy , in Philosophical Works , E. Haldane and G. Ross (trans. and eds.), London: Cambridge University Press, 1979, pp. 201–302.
• Kekes, J., 1983, “Wisdom,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 20(3): 277–286.
• Lehrer, Keith, B. Jeannie Lum, Beverly A. Slichta, and Nicholas D. Smith (eds.), 1996, Knowledge, Teaching, and Wisdom , Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
• Lehrer, K., and N. Smith, 1996, “Introduction,” in Lehrer et al . 1996, pp. 3–17.
• Maxwell, N., 1984, From Knowledge to Wisdom , Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Norman, A., 1996, “Teaching Wisdom,” in Lehrer et al . 1996, pp. 253–265.
• Nozick, R., 1989, “What is Wisdom and Why Do Philosophers Love it So?” in The Examined Life , New York: Touchstone Press, pp. 267–278.
• Plato, The Apology , in The Collected Dialogues of Plato , Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (eds.), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978, pp. 3–26.
• Plato, The Republic , in The Collected Dialogues of Plato , Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (eds.), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978, pp. 575–844.
• Ryan, S., 1996, “Wisdom,” in Lehrer et al . 1996, pp. 233–242.
• –––, 1999, “What is Wisdom?” Philosophical Studies , 93: 119–139.
• –––, 2012, “Wisdom, Knowledge, and Rationality,” Acta Analytica , 27(2): 99–112.
• Sternberg, R., 2001, “Why Schools Should Teach for Wisdom: The Balance Theory of Wisdom in Educational Settings,” Educational Psychologist , 36(4): 227–245.
• Tiberius, V., 2008, The Reflective Life: Living Wisely With Our Limits , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Whitcomb, D., 2010, “Wisdom,” in Routledge Companion to Epistemology , S. Bernecker and D. Pritchard (eds.), London: Routledge.
• Zagzebski, L., 1996, Virtues of the Mind , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

The Wisdom Page http://www.wisdompage.com/

[Please contact the author with suggestions.]

evidence | justification, epistemic: coherentist theories of | justification, epistemic: foundationalist theories of | justification, epistemic: internalist vs. externalist conceptions of | knowledge: analysis of | modesty and humility | reliabilist epistemology

Copyright © 2013 by Sharon Ryan < sharon . ryan @ mail . wvu . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Numismatics
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Social History
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Legal System - Costs and Funding
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Restitution
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Social Issues in Business and Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Sustainability
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Disability Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous
• Next chapter >

1 (page 1) p. 1 The Gap between Knowledge and Wisdom

• Published: February 2001
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

‘The gap between knowledge and wisdom’ asks: Does the scientific conception of the world eradicate the need for an answer to the question of the meaning of life? Ancient philosophy was characterized by an identity, or at least an attempted integration, of knowledge and wisdom: namely, that a knowledge of how things were the way they were would lead to wisdom in the conduct of one's life. In the modern world, through the extraordinary progress of the sciences, this unity has split apart. The question of wisdom, and its related question of the meaning of life, should at the very least move closer to the centre of philosophical activity.

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Announcements

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

By signing up, you agree to the our terms and our Privacy Policy agreement.

A Horseman in the Sky by Ambrose Bierce: Bed First Year English

The spanish church: bed first summary and questions, leaving by m.g vassanji: class 12 optional english.

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell: Summary and Theme/Class 12 Compulsory English

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell Summary and Theme/Class 12 Compulsory English

Knowledge and wisdom aren’t same. Knowledge helps people to make living but wisdom makes our life. They are different to each other. Knowledge is related with acquisition of data. But wisdom is practical use of knowledge in our life. Wisdom helps to create value. We can gain knowledge from memorization but we need practical experience to achieve wisdom. A sense of proportion is needed to acquire wisdom. Knowledge can be misused to destroy human life.

In fact, knowledge and wisdom are necessary for completion of life. One is incomplete without another. Wisdom is necessary in public as well as private life. Wisdom directs our life goals. It keeps away us from personal prejudices created by knowledge. Wisdom can change enemies into friends. If we are free from control of our sense organs then we can feel wisdom inside us. We need to love other people too. We should think beyond our lives. We must start loving and caring other people to venture on the journey of wisdom.

Russell thinks that wisdom should be used as a goal of education. We are unwise at the beginning of our life. But we can achieve wisdom in our life by cultivating it. Abraham Lincoln, Queen Elizabeth,etc removed evil from their life to welcome wisdom in their life. The current age is knowledge age but we need to teach value of wisdom to make people wise.

Knowledge is increasing but not wisdom. Study, experience and research help to gain knowledge. But wisdom teaches us to do better for humanity. Knowledge functions as an engine and wisdom as driver.

Action is related with knowledge. But wisdom is related with results of actions. So, comprehensive vision is linked with wisdom. Knowledge helps to reduce death rate by supplying medicines. But it doesn’t analyze the result of increasing population. Increase in population brings the problem of scarcity of food. Wisdom helps us to see the negative sides of such research and medicine. So, knowledge should be driven by wisdom. Both are inter-related to each other.

Related Posts

Facing death by august strindberg: class 12 english note: summary and theme, a matter of husbands: one act play by ferenc molnar :summary and theme, humility: essay by yuval noah harari: summary and theme (class 12 english note), 58 comments.

Wow, awesome blog format! How lengthy have you been blogging for? you make running a blog glance easy. The full glance of your site is magnificent, as well as the content! You can see similar here najlepszy sklep

Hi there! Do you know if they make any plugins to assist with Search Engine Optimization? I’m trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I’m not seeing very good success.

If you know of any please share. Kudos! I saw similar text here: Scrapebox AA List

Hi there, I wish for to subscribe for this website to take hottest updates, thus where can i do it please help out.

Also visit my homepage; vpn special coupon code 2024

The other day, while I was at work, my cousin stole my iPad and tested to see if it can survive a thirty foot drop, just so she can be a youtube sensation. My iPad is now destroyed and she has 83 views. I know this is completely off topic but I had to share it with someone!

my website – vpn 2024

Hello there I am so delighted I found your webpage, I really found you by accident, while I was searching on Yahoo for something else, Anyways I am here now and would just like facebook vs eharmony to find love online say kudos for a incredible post and a all round enjoyable blog (I also love the theme/design), I don’t have time to browse it all at the moment but I have book-marked it and also added in your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read much more, Please do keep up the great work.

Hi there to all, how is all, I think every one is getting more from this web site, and your views are fastidious for new visitors.

Feel free to visit my web-site :: eharmony special coupon code 2024

Hey! I’m at work browsing your blog from my new iphone 4! Just wanted to say I love reading through your blog and look forward to all your posts! Keep up the superb work!

my web-site :: nordvpn special coupon code 2024

Great info and right to the point. I don’t know if this is truly the best place to ask but do you people have any ideea where to employ some professional writers? Thx 🙂 Escape rooms

I like this site very much, Its a rattling nice berth to read and incur information. !

Pingback: Pichler Tischdecken

Pingback: ชอบหีสวย.com

Next time I read a blog, Hopefully it does not disappoint me just as much as this particular one. I mean, I know it was my choice to read through, but I actually thought you would have something useful to talk about. All I hear is a bunch of complaining about something you could fix if you were not too busy searching for attention.

The next time I read a blog, I hope that it does not disappoint me just as much as this particular one. I mean, I know it was my choice to read through, but I truly thought you’d have something interesting to talk about. All I hear is a bunch of whining about something that you can fix if you were not too busy seeking attention.

I was able to find good advice from your content.

Hello there, I do believe your blog could possibly be having web browser compatibility problems. Whenever I look at your website in Safari, it looks fine however when opening in IE, it has some overlapping issues. I simply wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other than that, fantastic site.

I was extremely pleased to discover this great site. I want to to thank you for your time due to this fantastic read!! I definitely appreciated every little bit of it and I have you book-marked to see new stuff in your website.

Your style is so unique in comparison to other people I’ve read stuff from. Thanks for posting when you’ve got the opportunity, Guess I’ll just book mark this web site.

Very good post. I’m dealing with a few of these issues as well..

I used to be able to find good advice from your blog articles.

Good day! I simply would like to offer you a huge thumbs up for the excellent information you have here on this post. I am coming back to your site for more soon.

I used to be able to find good info from your blog articles.

An outstanding share! I have just forwarded this onto a friend who had been conducting a little research on this. And he in fact bought me dinner due to the fact that I discovered it for him… lol. So allow me to reword this…. Thank YOU for the meal!! But yeah, thanks for spending the time to discuss this subject here on your web site.

Oh my goodness! Incredible article dude! Thank you, However I am going through problems with your RSS. I don’t know why I cannot join it. Is there anybody having the same RSS problems? Anybody who knows the solution will you kindly respond? Thanks!!

Good post. I learn something new and challenging on blogs I stumbleupon everyday. It’s always exciting to read through articles from other authors and practice something from their sites.

You are so awesome! I do not suppose I’ve read something like this before. So nice to find somebody with a few genuine thoughts on this subject. Seriously.. many thanks for starting this up. This site is one thing that’s needed on the web, someone with some originality.

I really like it whenever people come together and share views. Great blog, keep it up.

This is a topic that is near to my heart… Best wishes! Where are your contact details though?

Greetings! Very helpful advice within this post! It’s the little changes that make the largest changes. Thanks for sharing!

I love reading through a post that will make men and women think. Also, thank you for allowing for me to comment.

Howdy, I do believe your blog could possibly be having browser compatibility issues. Whenever I take a look at your web site in Safari, it looks fine however, if opening in I.E., it’s got some overlapping issues. I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Aside from that, excellent website.

I used to be able to find good advice from your blog posts.

Great info. Lucky me I discovered your blog by chance (stumbleupon). I have saved as a favorite for later!

I seriously love your website.. Very nice colors & theme. Did you develop this website yourself? Please reply back as I’m looking to create my very own blog and would like to find out where you got this from or what the theme is called. Appreciate it.

I seriously love your blog.. Pleasant colors & theme. Did you develop this website yourself? Please reply back as I’m looking to create my own personal website and want to find out where you got this from or exactly what the theme is called. Thank you!

I need to to thank you for this very good read!! I absolutely enjoyed every bit of it. I have got you bookmarked to look at new things you post…

An interesting discussion is definitely worth comment. I do believe that you need to publish more on this subject matter, it may not be a taboo subject but usually folks don’t speak about such issues. To the next! All the best!

Hi, I do think this is a great blog. I stumbledupon it 😉 I am going to revisit once again since I book marked it. Money and freedom is the best way to change, may you be rich and continue to guide others.

Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you penning this post and the rest of the website is also very good.

Can I simply just say what a relief to uncover an individual who actually understands what they are talking about on the internet. You definitely know how to bring an issue to light and make it important. More people really need to check this out and understand this side of the story. It’s surprising you are not more popular given that you certainly possess the gift.

I blog frequently and I seriously appreciate your information. Your article has truly peaked my interest. I’m going to bookmark your website and keep checking for new information about once a week. I subscribed to your Feed too.

That is a really good tip especially to those fresh to the blogosphere. Brief but very accurate info… Appreciate your sharing this one. A must read post!

Greetings! Very helpful advice in this particular post! It’s the little changes that will make the most significant changes. Thanks a lot for sharing!

Aw, this was an extremely nice post. Spending some time and actual effort to produce a really good article… but what can I say… I hesitate a lot and never seem to get nearly anything done.

Great information. Lucky me I found your site by chance (stumbleupon). I have bookmarked it for later!

Very good post! We will be linking to this great content on our site. Keep up the good writing.

You made some decent points there. I checked on the net to learn more about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your views on this site.

An intriguing discussion is worth comment. I think that you ought to write more on this subject matter, it may not be a taboo subject but generally folks don’t speak about these issues. To the next! Cheers.

You’ve made some decent points there. I looked on the internet for more info about the issue and found most people will go along with your views on this site.

Howdy! I just wish to give you a huge thumbs up for the great information you have right here on this post. I am returning to your site for more soon.

Hi, I do think this is an excellent web site. I stumbledupon it 😉 I will come back yet again since I saved as a favorite it. Money and freedom is the best way to change, may you be rich and continue to help other people.

Very good post. I will be facing some of these issues as well..

Oh my goodness! Awesome article dude! Thank you, However I am having troubles with your RSS. I don’t understand the reason why I am unable to subscribe to it. Is there anybody having the same RSS issues? Anybody who knows the solution will you kindly respond? Thanks.

This is the perfect webpage for everyone who really wants to find out about this topic. You understand so much its almost hard to argue with you (not that I really would want to…HaHa). You certainly put a fresh spin on a topic that has been written about for many years. Excellent stuff, just great.

I could not refrain from commenting. Perfectly written!

Very good post. I’m facing a few of these issues as well..

It’s hard to come by educated people on this subject, however, you sound like you know what you’re talking about! Thanks

I needed to thank you for this very good read!! I definitely enjoyed every little bit of it. I’ve got you book marked to look at new stuff you post…

Your style is really unique in comparison to other people I have read stuff from. Thanks for posting when you have the opportunity, Guess I’ll just bookmark this blog.

Leave A Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

No thanks, I’m not interested.

Wisdom vs. Knowledge: What They Mean and When to Use Them

What to Know Knowledge usually refers to information or awareness that someone has about a subject, whether from education or experience, as in “she has a lot of first-hand knowledge about the video game industry as both a player and a designer.” Wisdom refers instead to someone’s good sense, judgment, or insight (“he demonstrated wisdom by not responding to the taunts of his political opponent”)—in other words, to their ability to process, apply, or otherwise act on knowledge.

If you’re dealing strictly with information, understanding, or awareness, the word you’re looking for is knowledge :

Let me share some knowledge with you: unlike most bats, the Samoan flying fox is active primarily during the daytime. It’s common knowledge that ancient Romans spoke Latin, not Italian. To my knowledge , the bus is running late today because of the weather.

If you’re talking about sense, insight, or judgment (things that concern how we process or act on knowledge or experience), the word to reach for is wisdom :

Let me share some wisdom with you: putting up bat houses near your garden is a good idea because bats are great pollinators. The best pearl of wisdom I ever received from my grandfather was “Rome wasn’t built in a day.” I’m not sure I agree with the wisdom of keeping such a small bus fleet in a city of this size.

Wisdom teeth are the third and final set of molars that emerge from our gums, and are so named because they usually appear in our late teens or early twenties—an age when, we hope, we have gained a certain level of maturity or “wisdom.”

This little nugget of knowledge is interesting on its own, but it can also be useful for telling the words wisdom and knowledge apart. We don’t call them “knowledge teeth,” after all. That’s because knowledge usually refers to information or awareness about a particular subject, rather than the good sense, judgment, or insight implied by wisdom . In other words, it’s not as if your final molars pop out once you’ve read a particular book or taken enough trips to the science museum. Knowledge is knowing that partially erupted wisdom teeth can lead to pericoronitis ; wisdom is not sharing this fact with your best friend who is dentophobic (afraid of dentists).

Word of the Day

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Games & Quizzes

Commonly Confused

'canceled' or 'cancelled', is it 'home in' or 'hone in', the difference between 'race' and 'ethnicity', homophones, homographs, and homonyms, on 'biweekly' and 'bimonthly', grammar & usage, more words you always have to look up, the difference between 'i.e.' and 'e.g.', more commonly misspelled words, plural and possessive names: a guide, commonly misspelled words, pilfer: how to play and win, 8 words with fascinating histories, flower etymologies for your spring garden, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat.

• About Project
• Testimonials

Business Management Ideas

Essay on Wisdom: Top 4 Essays on Wisdom

• Essay on Wisdom

Essay on Relationship Between Wisdom and Knowledge

Essay on wisdom is power, essay on true wisdom come from experience.

Wisdom is one of the highest forms of human characteristics. Through wisdom, virtues can be brought to life. The beauty of wisdom is that it is not dependent on the theories that are written in books, or the curriculum in the schools and colleges. It is not something that can be transferred just by talking about it. Wisdom is how life shapes us. It is about the impacts that we have upon our soul while going through all sorts of pleasant and unpleasant experiences of life.

Various Versions But One

Many philosophers, religious institutions, and educationalists have defined wisdom in their own definite ways. Some try to relate it to the right way of living, some say that wisdom is acknowledging and being answerable to God for all the deeds. It has also been known to associate with decision-making between right and wrong, habits like speaking truth, following the moral values.

Intelligence is Not Always Wisdom

Although, on a more spiritual note, or a generic note, as we may say, wisdom is not confined to some rules or paths. A collection of experiences and virtues shape our wisdom. One may have a wide range and depth of knowledge but that doesn’t necessarily make her/him wise.

Illustrations

There are so many beautiful illustrations reflecting light on the uniqueness and significance of wisdom. It is very simple and possible for almost anybody to learn to fire a gun. But not everybody is capable of making the right decision about when to and when not to fire the gun. This decision-making requires wisdom.

The Importance of Wisdom

But why so much fuss about wisdom? How does it make our life different or change it? Well, wisdom takes us above the loop of feelings, emotions, and the whirlpools of envy, restlessness, and anger. It brings peace to the heart and to the mind as well. It is only through wisdom, that one may realize that forgiving others bad deeds, ignoring their faults, and being kind and accepting to all is the highest and truest virtues of all human beings.

Wisdom is the germination of the seeds of empathy, compassion, and kindness. It is the eruption of unconditional love toward every soul, whether human beings, animals, or trees. Wisdom gives us the ability to see the beauty and real power of nature. In true words, this is the real way of being close to God.

It is only through wisdom that one understands and realizes that religions, rules of worshipping, and confining God to being a particular person or version are nothing but just a human way of interpretation of the power of nature. To a wise person, they look mere concepts to him and he/she is able to go beyond these things. The definition of God, the right path, the understanding of the whole universe changes to him. Wisdom gets us out of the chains of the societal norms and allows us to look past them. It shows us the real purpose of life and gifts us with the power to attain and live with that true purpose.

Many of us may get confused when asked about the difference or relationship between wisdom and knowledge. On the surface level, both look similar, if not the same. But the thing is, wisdom is more abstract in nature and knowledge is somewhat technical.

Knowledge comes from reading, exploring, learning, and educating oneself. In order to increase the knowledge, one can turn toward reading more books or learning and specializing in a skill. In other words, it is measurable up to a certain extent.

Wisdom is what life and its experiences teach us. Being wise is not the same as being intelligent. It is about much more than just the skills and mastery of a subject. In fact, wisdom is about human virtues, that makes us different from other animal species. These virtues are developing empathy, having compassion and kindness, becoming more self-aware of our thoughts, emotions, and feelings.

Wisdom and Knowledge

The difference between the two is very subtle. However, if put into simpler words, it is not that difficult to understand either. One can gain knowledge and know what is right and wrong, what is healthy and what is unhealthy, how to perform a task, how to drive, how to cook. All these things can be learned and specialized in. But, the ability to decide what is right and what is wrong, the capacity to choose the right and skip the wrong, comes from wisdom.

In another way, the ability to use the learned knowledge in the best and most ethical way is called wisdom. Knowing how to use the knowledge is wisdom. Knowledge can be given but wisdom cannot. Knowledge can be learned but wisdom can only be attained.

An example would be the best way to understand the concepts deeply. So, for instance, all kinds of thoughts, whether positive or negative, healthy or toxic, happy or sad come to our mind. We feel them and know that these feelings are a very natural part of human beings. This is knowledge. But understanding, observing, and staying aware and detached of these thoughts requires wisdom. Wisdom takes us to a much higher level and answers the riddle of why we are feeling in a particular way and whether we should act on those feelings or not. That judgment call depends on our wisdom.

There have been many philosophical, religious, and educational versions and definitions of wisdom and knowledge. Nonetheless, all lead to the same conclusion. Everybody knows and has been taught about the right way of living but not all can do it really. That is where a fine demarcation comes between knowledge and wisdom. To be able to apply the knowledge, to be able to think, and acknowledge why things are the way they are, makes us wise.

Thus, it is only through wisdom that we begin to behave beyond the petty attributes like self-obsession, jealousy, anger and instead, learn to grow as a human being filled with compassion, empathy, acceptance, and love for all.

The human race has wondered and marveled for a long time for its distinguished ability to behave and think differently than other animal species. We have highly evolved emotional, mental, and social etiquette. But is that the end of the list? Of course not. There is something very peculiar about us which makes us stand out as a species, which transforms us from Homo Sapiens into human beings. And that is called wisdom.

Seeking Wisdom

There is a reason why people do not find peace in spite of being surrounded by all kinds of materialistic pleasures. There is also a reason why many people living a highly comfortable and rich life, leave it just like that and set out to explore something that is still unknown to them.

In India, such ways of life are not new to us. We have always been surrounded bys saints and celibates. The culture in India has long been enriching. It has always focused less on physical pleasures and more on the seeking nature within us. After a certain point, we all begin to realize that the worldly amusements can only satisfy us on a superficial level but cannot quench our soul. For our spiritual growth, something deeper is needed.

What is not Wisdom

All around us, we see the world burning with feelings of competition, unsparing greed, unforgiveness, jealousy, anger, and what not. And this is not the story of those who lack basic amenities to a dignified life. This is the case of people who have everything in abundance but peace and gratitude.

Wisdom takes us from this path of uncertainty and shallowness and brightens up with the light of truth. And that same truth would liberate us. This is the power of wisdom. Wisdom is not restricted to listening to some discourses or following the religious rites and rituals. It is about realizing the darkness of greed, that the constant need for competing with each other is nothing but just a bottomless pit. A whirlpool of desires.

Wisdom is Empowering

Through our experiences comes a realization that the peace of our mind is in our hands. This is the most empowering thing that can happen to us and no book can teach this to us. It is like reaching and activating the seeds and portals of consciousness which were dormant within us till now. The whole phenomenon enriches us at a much deeper level and calms down the inside chaos. After which, we start to see the beauty in everything and learn to accept life the way it is. Our heart is filled with forgiveness and compassion.

Wisdom frees us from the chains of a limited mind so that we do not remain the slaves of our own desires. Books can teach us what is just and what is unjust. But the power of standing and walking down that just path is provided by our wisdom. This spiritual and emotional advancement is irreplaceable and can only become possible through wisdom.

They say that life changes you and shapes you like nothing else can. That there is a great difference between knowing something and living it. Well, it is quite true in the case of wisdom. True wisdom comes only from experience.

What the Life Phases Teach Us

Let us recall how we felt when we were just a kid. Life looked so uncomplicated and manageable at that time. Then, came teenage. Our own definition of life was metamorphosed a bit. We realized that after all, life is not that simple. It is not confined to having your favorite meals and dresses.

When we crossed teenage and entered into adulthood, even the young age years looked dreamy and we again felt that life is more than just having a relationship. It is more about making yourself independent, taking care of ourselves and our loved ones. Being responsible and accountable for our decisions and choices topped the list of our way of living.

How Experience Shapes Us

We all travel different paths of life. The ups and downs of our lives are unique. It is interesting to observe that same event or experience can be perceived in a completely non-identical way by two different persons. The impacts and effects of a trauma, a joy, or any other major change of events may not be the same for both of them. This is the reason, even after going through the same phases and stages of living in this world, we may end up having dissimilar perceptions of life.

Wisdom is Independent

There is no specific set of rules to becoming wise. What’s more intriguing is that having the same age, gender, or ethnicity does not make two people wise in the same way. Wisdom is independent of these factors. A person may attain wisdom at the age of 20, that doesn’t in any way mean that another person of age 40 would be double wise.

True Wisdom

Truth is, true wisdom can only be attained through experiencing life and that means having experienced it in its fullest form. Understanding that life is not always about being happy, satisfaction, or running for temptations. In fact, sorrow, pain, tragedy, self-restraint are a part of it. True wisdom teaches us that if life has to be embraced, then, the only way to do that is through acceptance, self-observation, and with full consciousness.

With practice, wisdom takes us above the basic instincts. It doesn’t let us be reduced to mere puppets in the hands of our instant gratification. Wisdom gives our mind the power to differentiate between justified and unjustified and act accordingly. Experiencing the bright and dark, both faces of life, are we filled with love, kindness, compassion, and non-judgment toward others and also ourselves. And there is no shortcut to that. Every event in the life has a purpose. It is trying to teach us something. Opening our mind and soul to it fully is what wisdom teaches us.

Get FREE Work-at-Home Job Leads Delivered Weekly!

Join more than 50,000 subscribers receiving regular updates! Plus, get a FREE copy of How to Make Money Blogging!

Message from Sophia!

No related posts.

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Billionaires

• Donald Trump
• Warren Buffett
• Email Address
• Free Stock Photos
• Keyword Research Tools
• URL Shortener Tools
• WordPress Theme

Book Summaries

• How To Win Friends
• Rich Dad Poor Dad
• The Code of the Extraordinary Mind
• The Luck Factor
• The Millionaire Fastlane
• The ONE Thing
• Think and Grow Rich
• 100 Million Dollar Business
• Business Ideas

Digital Marketing

• Mobile Addiction
• Social Media Addiction
• Computer Addiction
• Drug Addiction
• Internet Addiction
• TV Addiction
• Healthy Habits
• Morning Rituals
• Wake up Early
• Cholesterol
• Reducing Cholesterol
• Fat Loss Diet Plan
• Reducing Hair Fall
• Sleep Apnea
• Weight Loss

Internet Marketing

• Email Marketing

Law of Attraction

• Subconscious Mind
• Vision Board
• Visualization

Law of Vibration

• Professional Life

Motivational Speakers

• Bob Proctor
• Robert Kiyosaki
• Vivek Bindra
• Inner Peace

Productivity

• Not To-do List
• Project Management Software
• Negative Energies

Relationship

• Getting Back Your Ex

Self-help 21 and 14 Days Course

Self-improvement.

• Body Language
• Complainers
• Emotional Intelligence
• Personality

Social Media

• Project Management
• Anik Singal
• Baba Ramdev
• Dwayne Johnson
• Jackie Chan
• Leonardo DiCaprio
• Narendra Modi
• Nikola Tesla
• Sachin Tendulkar
• Sandeep Maheshwari
• Shaqir Hussyin

Website Development

Wisdom post, worlds most.

• Expensive Cars

Our Portals: Gulf Canada USA Italy Gulf UK

Privacy Overview

How to go to Heaven

How to get right with god.

What is the difference between wisdom and knowledge?

For further study, related articles, subscribe to the, question of the week.

Get our Question of the Week delivered right to your inbox!

• _Grade VIII
• _ _Social Studies
• _ _(Grade XI- New Course)
• _ _ _Language Development
• _ _ _Literary Studies
• _ _ _ _Short Stories
• _ _ _ _Poems
• _ _(Grade XII- New Course)
• _Basic Level
• Moral Stories
• General Knowledge
• Information

Wednesday, January 26, 2022

Summary of Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell | Essay | Class XII English Note (Exercise)

Knowledge and Wisdom by Bertrand Russell

In the essay, Russel distinguishes knowledge from wisdom. Knowledge is defined as the acquisition of data and information, whereas wisdom as the practical application and use of the knowledge to create value. Wisdom is achieved through learning and practical experience. His lamentation is that though vast knowledge has been acquired, there has been no corresponding increase in wisdom.

Russell thinks several factors contribute to wisdom. He puts first a sense of proportion. It is the capacity to consider all important factors in a problem carefully. Specialization makes it difficult. For example, scientists discover new medicines but they do not know what effect they will have on people’s life. The medicines may reduce the infant death rate. But it may lead to increased population. In poor countries it may lead to starvation. If there are more people, it may decrease the standard of life. The knowledge of the composition of the atom could be misused by a lunatic to destroy the world. If misused, knowledge of atom can lead humans to destruction by producing nuclear weapons.

Russel stresses on comprehensiveness an important factor that constitutes wisdom. As human knowledge becomes more specialized, one who is engrossed in the study of his specific field may fail to predict the outcome of the knowledge he is pursuing. Knowledge should be combined with the total needs of mankind. Even complete knowledge is not enough. It should be associated with certain awareness of the ends of human life. The study of history can prove it. For example, Hegel wrote with great knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to war. It is necessary therefore to combine knowledge with feelings. The men who have knowledge and have no feelings lack wisdom.

Wisdom is needed both in public and private life. People require wisdom to decide the objective of their life. We need it to free ourselves from personal prejudices. We may follow even a novel thing unwisely if it is too big to achieve. People may attempt to achieve the impossible, and harm themselves in the process. In personal life, says Russell, wisdom is needed to avoid dislike for one another. Two persons may become enemies because of their prejudice. One may dislike the other for imaginary faults. If they can be told that we all have flaws, then they may become friends.

Wisdom exists when we free ourselves from the control of our sense organs. Our ego develops through our senses. One cannot be free from the sense of sight, sound and touch. The world is primarily recognized through our senses. Thus, we stop thinking of ourselves alone. We start thinking of other people and grow wiser. It is difficult to completely to make us free from selfishness, but we can think of things beyond our immediate surroundings. Wisdom gets birth when we start loving others.

Russell feels that wisdom can be taught as an aim of education. The message in the parable of the Good Samaritan is that we ought to love our neighbor whether friend or enemy. Many times we miss the message in this parable because we fail to love those who cause harm to the society. The author draws out examples from the history of Queen Elizabeth I, Henry IV and Abraham Lincoln, who were free from the errors committed by other important people in the past.

The risk of hatred and narrow-mindedness can be identified in the course of giving knowledge. Russell feels knowledge and wisdom can be amalgamated in the arrangement of education. People should be educated to perceive things in relation to other things of the world. They should be encouraged to think of themselves as world citizens.

Understanding the text

a. What are the factors that contribute to wisdom?

The factors that contribute to wisdom are:

- a sense of proportion

- comprehensiveness

- choice of ends to pursue

- emancipation from personal prejudice

b. What message does the writer try to convey with the example of technicians?

He tries to tell us knowledge itself cannot save the world. Knowledge without wisdom will not be beneficial to the world and in some cases will even seriously threaten humanity. So, a wise person should have a sense of comprehensiveness.

c. Which leaders does Russel say were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly?

Queen Elizabeth I, Henry IV and Abraham Lincoln were the leaders who were able to mix knowledge and wisdom soundly.

d. Why is wisdom needed not only in public ways but in private life equally?

Wisdom is needed not only in public ways but in private life equally to get rid of personal prejudice. As our thoughts and feelings become less personal, we may gain wisdom.

e. What, according to Russel, is the true aim of education?

According to Russel, the true aim of education is wisdom.

f. Can wisdom be taught? If so, how?

Wisdom can be taught loving our neighbors whether friends or foes.

g. Why does the world need more wisdom in the future?

With every increase of knowledge and skill, our purposes may be unwise. This can be a threat to the world, and the world will need wisdom in the future.

Reference to the context

a. According to Russel, “The pursuit of knowledge may become harmful unless it is combined with wisdom.” Justify this statement.

As human knowledge becomes more specialized, one who is engrossed in the study of his specific field may fail to predict the outcome of the knowledge he is pursuing. Knowledge should be combined with the total needs of mankind. Even complete knowledge is not enough. It should be associated with certain awareness of the ends of human life. The study of history can prove it. For example, Hegel wrote with great knowledge about history, but made the Germans believe that they were a master race. It led to war. It is necessary therefore to combine knowledge with feelings. The men who have knowledge and have no feelings lack wisdom.

a. What, according to Russell, is the essence of wisdom? And how can one acquire the very essence?

According to Russell, the essence of wisdom is emancipation. It lies in impartiality, the ability to defy the physical world. The essayist believes the process of growing wise is that of tearing oneself away from the physical and emotional world and moving into a higher stage, the spiritual world. The process of impartiality constitutes in wisdom.

No comments:

Post a comment.

Email Subscription

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe Our Youtube Channel

Total pageviews.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms and conditions

Popular Posts

Copyright (c) 2021 Surya Xetri

Essay on Wisdom

Students are often asked to write an essay on Wisdom in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Wisdom

Understanding wisdom.

Wisdom is a special kind of knowledge. It’s not just about knowing facts, but understanding life. Wisdom helps us make good choices and learn from our experiences.

Wisdom and Age

People often link wisdom with age. As we grow older, we experience more, which can lead to greater wisdom. But age doesn’t guarantee wisdom. It’s about learning from experiences.

Wisdom and Education

Education can provide knowledge, but wisdom comes from applying that knowledge in real life. It’s about understanding, not just remembering facts.

Importance of Wisdom

Wisdom is important because it guides us in life. It helps us make good decisions, understand others, and live a meaningful life.

250 Words Essay on Wisdom

Wisdom is often mistakenly conflated with intelligence or knowledge. However, it is a distinct concept, characterized by a deep understanding of life’s complexities, an ability to make sound judgments, and a capacity for empathy and compassion. Unlike intelligence, which is largely innate, wisdom is typically acquired through experience and introspection.

The Components of Wisdom

Wisdom can be broken down into three key components: cognitive, reflective, and affective. The cognitive component involves an understanding of life and its uncertainties. The reflective component pertains to the ability to look inward and understand one’s own behavior and motivations. The affective component is characterized by empathy and compassion for others.

Contrary to popular belief, wisdom is not necessarily tied to age. While age can bring experiences that contribute to wisdom, it is the quality of these experiences, and one’s reflection on them, that truly matters. Young individuals can be wise beyond their years, while some older individuals may lack wisdom.

The Value of Wisdom

In a rapidly changing world, wisdom has never been more valuable. It allows us to navigate life’s complexities with grace and resilience, fostering personal growth and societal progress. Wisdom also promotes empathy and understanding, vital for bridging divides in our increasingly interconnected world.

In conclusion, wisdom is a multifaceted concept that transcends mere intelligence or knowledge. It is a profound understanding of life and humanity, honed through experience and introspection. In a world fraught with uncertainty, the pursuit of wisdom is a worthy endeavor.

500 Words Essay on Wisdom

Introduction, the nature of wisdom.

Wisdom is often associated with age, as it is perceived that life experiences contribute to its development. However, it is not merely a byproduct of time but rather a result of how one processes and learns from experiences. It is the ability to discern and judge which aspects of that knowledge are true, right, lasting, and applicable to one’s life.

Wisdom is also characterized by its universality. It transcends cultural, social, and geographical boundaries. The wisdom of understanding human emotions, for instance, is applicable across cultures and societies. It underlines the shared human experience and our collective struggle to make sense of the world.

Wisdom and Emotional Intelligence

Wisdom, in this context, is not just about intellectual understanding but also about emotional resilience. It involves the ability to navigate through the complexities of our emotions, to learn from our failures and to find meaning in our experiences.

Wisdom in the Digital Age

In the digital age, where information is readily available, the distinction between wisdom and knowledge becomes even more critical. The internet offers an abundance of information, but wisdom is required to sift through this vast sea of data and extract what is truly valuable.

In conclusion, wisdom is a complex and multifaceted concept that encompasses deep understanding, emotional intelligence, and the ability to apply knowledge in a meaningful way. It is a critical skill in our modern world, helping us navigate through an abundance of information and make sense of our experiences. Wisdom is not just about knowing; it’s about understanding. It is not just about facts; it’s about meaning. It is not just about information; it’s about insight. In essence, wisdom is the compass that guides us through the labyrinth of life.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Wisdom: Meaning, structure, types, arguments, and future concerns

• Published: 05 February 2022
• Volume 42 , pages 15030–15051, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Kaili Zhang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5375-4098 1   na1 ,
• Juan Shi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6445-0308 2   na1 ,
• Fengyan Wang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2167-6830 1 &
• Michel Ferrari 3  

15k Accesses

16 Citations

16 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

A Correction to this article was published on 21 March 2022

This article has been updated

Narrowing the debate about the meaning of wisdom requires two different understandings of wisdom. (a) As action or behaviour, wisdom refers to well-motivated actors achieving an altruistic outcome by creatively and successfully solving problems. (b) As a psychological trait, wisdom refers to a global psychological quality that engages intellectual ability, prior knowledge and experience in a way that integrates virtue and wit, and is acquired through life experience and continued practice. Thus, we propose a two-dimensional theory of wisdom that integrates virtue and wit. Wisdom can be further divided into “humane wisdom” and “natural wisdom” according to the types of capability required. At the same time, we propose that wisdom classification should integrate the views of Sternberg and Wang and be divided into three types: domain-specific wisdom, domain-general wisdom, and omniscient/ overall wisdom. We then discuss three pressing questions about wisdom, and consider five issues important to the future of wisdom research in psychology.

Similar content being viewed by others

Understanding Theories of Practical Wisdom

The Multi-dimensional Character of Wisdom

From Personal Striving to Positive Influence: Exploring Wisdom in Real-Life Contexts

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Since wisdom research in psychology began in the late 1970s (Clayton, 1975 ), many scientific theories about wisdom have emerged, including: (a) the Berlin wisdom paradigm (Baltes & Kunzmann, 2004 ; Baltes & Smith, 2008 ; Baltes & Staudinger, 1993 , 2000 ; Scheibe et al., 2007 ), (b) the balance theory of wisdom (Sternberg, 1998 , 2018 ), (c) the self-transcendence wisdom theory (Levenson et al., 2005 ), (d) the three-dimensional wisdom theory (Ardelt, 2003 ; Thomas et al., 2015 ), (e) the H.E.R.O.(E.) model of wisdom (Webster, 2003 ; Webster et al., 2014 , 2017 ), (f) the process view of wisdom (Yang, 2008 , 2013 , 2016 , 2017 ), and (g) the integrating virtue and wit Footnote 1 theory of wisdom (Chen & Wang, 2013 ; Wang et al., 2019 , pp. 376–378; Wang & Zheng, 2012 , 2014 , 2015 ).

However, owing to its complex meaning, cultural embeddedness and variability—not to mention different academic disciplines, research perspectives, and researcher preferences—we have yet to reach a scientific consensus about wisdom. As a result, although widely discussed, we find a wide variety of scientific meanings of wisdom with different dimensions on self-report measures designed to measure wisdom. This not only affects the replicability of wisdom research, but also makes psychological discussion of wisdom increasingly difficult, ultimately affecting the potential development of a science of wisdom. Likewise, although scholars have classified wisdom in various ways, they have hardly considered the relationship between wisdom and professional knowledge. In this paper, we first examine existing definitions of wisdom, and then propose a new integrative definition and two classifications of wisdom. Three arguments were subsequently clarified. Finally, we highlight five issues of concern for the future science of wisdom.

What Is Wisdom?

It is difficult to find a comprehensive general definition of wisdom (Grossmann et al., 2020 ; Kramer, 2000 ). Indeed, contemporary psychology has definitions of wisdom that range from a constellation of personality attributes (e.g., Ardelt, 2003 ; Webster, 2003 , 2007 ), to rational knowledge (Case & Gosling, 2007 ), to practice or action, to important and practical expertise in fundamental life matters (e.g., Baltes & Smith, 1990 ; Baltes & Staudinger, 2000 ), to knowing how to live a good life (Grimm, 2014 ), and more (Aldwin, 2009 ; Weststrate & Glück, 2017 ). And none of the more than twenty definitions of wisdom we found (as shown in Table  1 ) is universally recognized.

Sternberg ( 2019a ) groups various definitions of wisdom into four types: (a) a personal psychological excellence, (b) a property of the situation, (c) an interaction between person and situation, and (d) a property of action.

It is appropriate to define wisdom as a personal psychological excellence. But, what specifically characterizes wisdom? Is it a special way of thinking (as for Piaget and Neo-Piagetians), a certain type of acquired knowledge (as in the Berlin’s wisdom paradigm), a combination of ability and personality (as for Ardelt), or some other individual psychological attribute? This question needs further study.

According to Grossmann ( 2017a ), wisdom is a property characteristic of individuals in situations rather than a personal excellence—whether or not a person is wise depends on the situation, and there is no general wisdom factor ( w factor) analogous to Spearman’s g (Sternberg, 2019a ). We agree with Grossmann that there is no pan-situational wisdom factor and firmly believe that human wisdom manifests in particular domains. For example, Martin Luther King, Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Einstein show great wisdom in their careers, but not in their personal lives (Sternberg, 2019a ), which proving that most people’s wisdom is domain specific, with very few possessing general wisdom, let alone universal wisdom in all times and places. And we also believe that situations are an important external moderator of wise behaviour. However, different from Grossmann, we believe that to completely deny the possibility of personal wisdom seems to make wisdom the object of sociology or law, not psychology. In fact, historically, when psychologists encountered analogous topics, they usually sought some role for individual psychological attributes. For example, when studying moral behaviour—which, like wise behaviour, is greatly influenced by the situation—experts in moral psychology, moral education, ethicists and philosophers all believe that there must be some moral quality behind moral behaviour that it is not completely situationally determined. For example, in Kohlberg’s theory, moral behaviour integrates moral judgment (moral motivation) and altruistic behaviour—thus, if an action is not virtuously motivated, it is not moral, even if the result is altruistic (Wang et al., 2019 , pp. 201–202). Likewise, since wise behaviour integrates virtue and wit (Wang & Zheng, 2015 ), an action lacking a virtuous motive cannot be called wise, even if it is talented and very successful. For example, Erich von Manstein unexpectedly ordered his armored forces across the Maginot line, and invaded France from the north, through Luxembourg and the Belgian Ardennes. The battle plan was a great success, and Manstein—along with Rommel and Guderian—was known as one of the three great generals of Nazi Germany. But for all opponents of the Nazis, worldwide, the invasion of France from the Arden Mountains, although ingenious and successful, was not a wise act, nor was Manstein a wise person.

The interactionist view that wisdom is the interaction between person and situation is “sociocultural”. Because it considers the sociocultural context within which wisdom occurs. According to Sternberg ( 2019a ), his own balance theory of wisdom is of this type. Sternberg is undoubtedly right to argue that wisdom can involve an interaction between people and situations, and that how different social and cultural backgrounds influence wisdom should be more fully recognized. However, if wisdom is no longer a personal psychological attribute, this is both contrary to common sense and poses the following problem: What psychological quality characterizes people who consistently pursue the common good? In our view, the study of wisdom should focus both on “what wisdom is” and “how wisdom manifests”. These two closely related questions are fundamentally different.

Wisdom is also regarded as a property of action, and wisdom research should not focus on individuals but on the actions of individuals or groups (Sternberg, 2019a ). Since researchers cannot directly study people’s conscious experience, they indirectly infer it from their behaviour. Thus, it is much easier to judge whether an action is wise than an individual. However, wise behaviour cannot be equated with personal experience of wisdom, since defining a psychological concept involves distinguishing its psychological attributes, adding behavioural elements as necessary—not from behaviour alone, as in behaviouristic psychology.

All in all, while these four ways of defining wisdom certainly have some merits, none of them is comprehensive.

Why do we need a unified definition of wisdom? We believe that a shared understanding of wisdom is important. Otherwise, how can wisdom scales based on different understandings of wisdom be evaluated relative to each other? Given the necessity and importance of a unified definition of wisdom, the following question is worth studying. How can a universally accepted definition of wisdom be found? To answer this question requires that existing definitions of wisdom be carefully examined.

Definitions and Components of Wisdom According to Previous Studies

Although different wisdom researchers define wisdom in different ways, they all share two common themes (as shown in Table 1 ): (a) Most definitions of wisdom emphasize cognition, meaning, and affect (Aldwin, 2009 ; Clayton & Birren, 1980 ). (b) Concerning for the welfare of humanity, including behaviour that support human life and the biological ecosystems that humans share (Kahn, 2005 ; Nayak, 2016 ).

In other words, most definitions point to wisdom as essential to creating a better world. For example, Sternberg ( 2019b ) argued that the goal of wisdom, which involves intelligence, creativity, and knowledge base, is the common good. The view that wisdom is an integration of virtue and wit is recognized by all wisdom theories. However, it is only a veil that has yet to be lifted. For example, Baltes and Staudinger ( 2000 ) argues that wisdom is “the perfect integration of mind and virtue”. Similarly, Grossmann et al. ( 2020 ) proposed a common wisdom model, which includes two elements: Meta-cognition and moral aspirations. They defined wisdom in empirical sciences as “morally-grounded excellence in certain aspects of meta-cognition”.

Two Meanings of Wisdom: Wise Behaviour and Wise Experience

According to our polyculture theory of wisdom, people adopt different principles according to their personal, social, and objective worldviews, and coordinate these principles to deal with problems and promote the long-term survival and prosperity of human civilization (Li et al., 2019 ). In other words, personal worldview and values are very important to one’s understanding of wisdom, and these are affected by culture. Therefore, integrating the essence of existing cultural definitions of wisdom is critical to constructing a more comprehensive understanding of wisdom (Ferrari & Alhosseini, 2019 ). With this idea in mind, Wang has been continuously optimizing his definition of wisdom originally proposed in 2004. After several refinements, Footnote 2 in 2017, Wang proposed defining wisdom within two distinct frames of reference: ordinary life (that is, life lived without experiencing any major difficulties or turbulence), and extraordinary life (that is, a life lived with some major difficulty, turbulence, or complex problems) (Wang & Fu, 2017 ). Most recently, Wang ( 2019 ) advocates defining wisdom as behaviour and psychological qualities that integrate virtue and wit. As behaviour, wisdom is attributed to behaviour through which a well-motivated actor solves a problem creatively and successfully to achieve an altruistic outcome (Wang & Fu, 2017 ). As a comprehensive psychological quality, wisdom integrates virtue and wit through intelligence, knowledge, and experience, all acquired through continuous practice (Wang & Fu, 2017 ). Individuals with this quality are insightful about people and things around them, managing and open-mindedly experiencing their life wisely. Motivated by good intentions, these individuals use their wits to correctly recognize, understand, and efficiently solve complex problems they encountered through correct, novel, innovative, and ethical methods, permanently enhancing the well-being of others, society and themselves (Wang & Fu, 2017 ).

Figure  1 depicts wisdom as a psychological quality that necessarily integrates one’s wits and virtue: (a) wits refer to normal or even extraordinary intelligence, positive modes of thinking, and rich procedural knowledge; (b) virtue refers to an individual’s good-heartedness. An empirical study using mouse-tracking, a technique that measures individuals’ mental processing in real time by tracking their reaction times and moving trajectory as they move a computer mouse, demonstrated the view that wisdom integrates virtue and wit (Li & Wang, 2017a ). This study found that compared with unwise personality related to immorality and incompetence, wise personality related to virtue and competence showed shorter reaction time and more direct movement trajectory when associated with “wisdom”. Further comparing the two dimensions of wise personality, this study also found that the association between competence and wisdom showed shorter reaction time and more direct movement trajectory than the association between virtue and wisdom. This suggested that, wisdom was more closely linked with competence than virtue (Li & Wang, 2017a ).

Schematic diagram of the connotation of wisdom as a psychological quality (adapted from Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p.189)

Wisdom can also refer to a wise person, someone who has performed wise acts in their areas of competence with no foolish acts that completely destroying their claim to wisdom. People who do only one wise thing in their lives are not usually considered wise, just ordinary or even unwise. Ordinary people occasionally act wisely, too. As the Chinese saying goes, “A wise man must sometimes lose, a fool must sometimes win/gain.” Although foolish men may sometimes act wisely, it happens rarely, few benefit and only for a short time.

Of course, judging an individual wise does not just depend on the number of wise actions but also on their impact. If someone makes a wise choice when confronted with a life and death situation that improves the well-being of many people for a long time, it is easy to regard that person as wise. For example, Xuan Wang, the founder of the Chinese character laser phototypesetting system, achieved only one great thing in his life, however, this one achievement led to the end of manual typesetting of Chinese characters—to the benefit of all Chinese-speaking people—so Xuan Wang is considered as a wise man.

In addition, wisdom integrates virtue and wit. Therefore, intellect, resourcefulness, and intellectual capacity alone are not sufficient for wisdom, nor are instinct, expert knowledge, or any particular mental process (Sternberg, 1998 ; Wang & Zheng, 2015 ).

Points to Consider when Evaluating Wisdom

The relationship between wisdom and culture.

Ferrari and Alhosseini ( 2019 ) argued that some wisdom (e.g., the Golden Rule) is shared across a range of cultures, some wisdom characteristic of one culture can be shared with others (e.g., Buddhist wisdom), and some wisdom is unique to certain cultures (e.g., wise mythical beings). We have an explanation for why this is so: cultural universality and relativity of wisdom are attributed to the universality and relativity of the virtue and wit contained in wisdom. In other words, culturally relative wisdom has specific meaning that differs in different periods and regions, while culturally universal wisdom is considered wises regardless of how people understand virtue and wit. We believe that universal wisdom always requires their integration. Therefore, how the actor’s culture views wit and virtue should be considered when evaluating wisdom.

The Delay in Evaluating Wisdom

True wisdom, especially great wisdom, is ultimately expressed by striving for the welfare of the majority, and it takes time to verify whether the majority truly benefit. Shortsighted behaviours that seem wise in the moment can come to seem foolish from a long-term perspective. By contrast, some behaviours that seem quite foolish in the short term (such as how an old Chinese man, Yokong, moved mountains using a pick, as well as how the man in Jean Giono’s The Man Who Planted Trees (Homme qui plantait des arbres) replanted a forest tree by tree over many years until the forest returned) can be acknowledged as wise as times goes by—the actions of a person or team are often better evaluated by posterity than by their contemporaries. To accurately capture the value and historical contribution of particular people, we need to be separated by generations from their entanglements and interference to their vital interests. Only time will tell whether someone is truly considered wise, because wisdom is ultimately measured by one’s contribution to civilization and not by one’s power or fame within their lifetime. To better seek wisdom, it is important not to over-emphasize timely and effective action in the immediate situation (Grossmann, 2017a ), and properly balance “temporary success and long-term failure” in pursuit of the common good.

The Structure of Wisdom

Sternberg ( 1998 ) proposed that wisdom involves patterns of behaviour favoured by society because they embody excellent psychological qualities, more specifically: knowledge (tacit and metacognitive), characteristic thinking (balanced, dialectical, etc.), personality traits (tolerance, strong will, etc.), positive emotional responses (compassion, gratitude), and correct motivation (mastery-oriented, altruistic). While, the Berlin wisdom model values expertise (Baltes & Smith, 1990 , 2008 ; Baltes & Staudinger, 1993 , 2000 ), the balance theory of wisdom values intelligence, creativity and skillful application (Sternberg, 1998 ); Neo-Piagetians, Grossmann and Ardelt value emotionally-informed good thinking (Ardelt, 2003 ; Grossmann, 2017a ; Kramer, 2000 ; Labouvie-Vief, 1990 ). To make sense of this, and other definitions of wisdom listed in Table 1 , we propose a two-dimensional structural view of wisdom, which essentially integrates virtue and wit.

Wisdom Needs Sufficient Wit

Only wisdom that contains sufficient wit in certain areas of expertise can ensure that an individual or group correctly recognizes and understands the complex problems they encountered and can solve them efficiently and effectively, using correct, innovative, and ethical methods.

What Is Wit as Related to Wisdom?

In general, wit, as related to wisdom, refers to one’s overall ability to deploy fluid intelligence to properly integrate crystallized intelligence (acquired through learning) to efficiently and effectively find and solve problems. On the basis of the factors related to wit in the balance theory of wisdom (Sternberg, 1998 ), we further summarize three main aspects of wit in wisdom: (a) normal to high levels of intelligence; (b) sufficient practical knowledge (including metacognitive and tacit knowledge); and (c) effective ways of thinking (e.g. strategies for identifying problems and solving them efficiently). Similarly, one’s wits, as implicated in wisdom, can be divided into these same three aspects, which are unevenly distributed between or within individuals. In other words, a wise person’s wits are “clumps of intelligence or ability”, in which one or more aspect of wit dominates. People who possess at least one outstanding aspect of wit and no apparent deficiency in any other aspect, can also be called wise. However, without an effective thinking style as a catalyst, deep practical knowledge is difficult to use to maximum effect. Without fluid intelligence and practical expertise, thinking is less effective. Therefore, optimally, wit combines the above three aspects.

Clearly, crystallized expert knowledge is not wisdom. Although knowledge is certainly a necessary condition for wisdom, only individuals able to use knowledge creatively for the benefit of many people are called wise. At least three kinds of people have profound knowledge will not be considered wise: (a) people with outdated knowledge; (b) people with a lot of textbook knowledge, but unable to use it in practice; and (c) people with a lot of textbook knowledge who can use it flexibly and effectively, but only to benefit themselves, or those close to them, at the expense of the common good. Sternberg’s ( 1998 ) celebrated theory thus clearly distinguishes wisdom from knowledge, while the Berlin wisdom paradigm considers expert knowledge necessary for wisdom (Baltes & Smith, 1990 , 2008 ; Baltes & Staudinger, 1993 , 2000 ).

According to Piaget ( 1950 ), and in modern cognitive psychology more generally, knowledge is neither a record nor copy of external objects, nor generated by subjects’ transcendental consciousness, but is constructed through an interaction between subject and environment. In this way, the knowledge created is individual knowledge; knowledge sometimes stored collectively as public knowledge using shared symbol systems (Gardner; Vygotsky). According to this definition, the scope of “knowledge” is very broad, including what Anderson calls declarative knowledge (knowing what) and procedural knowledge (knowing how), what Vervaeke calls perspectival knowledge (‘knowing to’) and what Polanyi ( 1976 ) calls explicit and tacit knowledge. Therefore, although some illiterate people can’t well-articulate what they know in writing or sometimes even in words, they may be quick-witted, with a wealth of perspectival, procedural and tacit knowledge about life—even people who have read little and have no expert knowledge can sometimes act wisely.

The Measure of Individual Wit

Accurately measuring an individual’s wit, must take a variety of factors into account, including demographic factors, degree of creativity, time, and long-term beneficial impact. Empirical studies of psychology typically involve college students with normal intelligence and budding professional expertise. Existing measures of individual wit among college students include the Three Dimensional Wisdom Scale (3D-WS, Ardelt, 2003 ), Self-Assessed Wisdom Scale (SAWS, Webster, 2007 ), and Adult Self-Transcendence Inventory (Levenson et al., 2005 ). More directly, the Integrative Wisdom Scale (IWS, Fu & Wang, 2020 ), uses four measures of individual wit: dialectical thinking, reflective thinking, innovative thinking, and critical thinking.

Wisdom Needs Sufficient Virtue

Virtue is another necessary condition for wisdom. Sternberg and Glück ( 2019 ) stated that morality and ethics are integral to wisdom: only virtuous individuals can ensure that their actions in complex situations will improve the public welfare over the long term, and not harm the legitimate rights and interests of others. This is an important prerequisite to distinguish wisdom from wit or social and emotional intelligence (Sternberg, 1998 ; Wang & Zheng, 2015 ).

Virtue in Wisdom

What virtues are contained in wisdom? To answer this question, the principles of virtue screening need to be established, and there are three main principles: (a) Uniqueness means that the selected virtue has its unique attribute that can clearly distinguish itself from other virtues. (b) Conciseness requires to achieve the best expression effect with the least virtue; (c) The combination of indigenous and international requires the selected virtues should not only reflect the local cultural consciousness, characteristics and spirit, but also be open, progressive and international. Based on the above three principles, from the perspective of positive moral qualities, virtues in wisdom mainly include the following six aspects, namely, awe (Keltner & Piff, 2020 ), temperance, responsibility, honesty, benevolence, and justice (Sternberg & Glück, 2019 ; Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p. 316). Only wit actions containing one or more of these virtues can be regarded as wise.

The wise virtue is mainly reflected in virtuous motivation, means, and results (benefit to others, or to oneself and others; Chen & Wang, 2013 ; Wang & Zheng, 2014 , pp. 207–214). In general, “virtuous means” are easy to quickly determine, but “virtuous motivations” and “virtuous results” are more difficult to judge. Motivation is internal and difficult for others to correctly perceive, and behavioural results take time to be acknowledged—a good short-term result does not necessarily mean a good result in the long run, and vice versa. Wise problem solving generally possess all the above three aspects. In some specific instances (such as the famous ticking time bomb thought experiment), it is sometimes regarded as ethical to choose the lesser of two evils that is relatively more advantageous to the vast majority of people (Levin, 1982 ).

There are currently three views of the relationship between wisdom and virtue: (a) The linear relationship insists a moderate or high positive correlation between wisdom-related abilities (e.g., critical thinking) and virtue-related abilities (e.g., moral reasoning) (Pasupathi & Staudinger, 2001 ). (b) The threshold relationship insists that virtue is a necessary but not sufficient condition for wisdom, and peak levels of wisdom is unlikely among individuals with very low levels of virtue (Pasupathi & Staudinger, 2001 ). (c) The subordinate relationship suggests that wisdom is a sub-dimension of virtue or vice versa (Grossmann & Kung, 2019 ; Zhang et al., 2019 ).

We believe that virtue is the threshold of and subordinate to wisdom for two reasons. (a) Each subtype of wisdom requires different types and levels of virtue and wit. Humane wisdom, displayed by individuals or groups when dealing with life problems in the humanities and social sciences, requires a moderate or high degree of virtue. However, as the wisdom displayed in studying objective laws of nature or adapting to (or transforming) the environment, natural wisdom only needs to reach a minimum threshold of virtue. Under the premise of basic virtue, a higher level of natural wisdom requires only a higher level of intellect. Therefore, the linear relationship between virtue and wisdom lacks sufficient theoretical and empirical support. (b) Wisdom is not an aspect of virtue because virtue and wit are both necessary conditions for wisdom. A person without virtue can’t be wise (but can be quick-witted); however, a person with virtue may not be wise (there are good people who are not quick-witted); in other words, both virtue and wit are necessary but not sufficient conditions for wisdom.

Measuring Wise Virtue

As previously mentioned, virtue in wisdom can be measured as individual moral character, or as the motivation, means, and result of wise behaviour. Virtue in wisdom measured as moral character is expressed through a set of positive qualities, like awe, abstinence, responsibility, honesty, love, and fairness, which can be taken as measure indicators. In addition to awe, the last five moral characteristics have been included in the IWS (Fu & Wang, 2020 ). The revised IWS will add items to measure awe.

The difficulty in measuring virtue in wisdom varies according to the motivations, means, and results of wise behaviours: means are external and can be judged easily, but motivations are intrinsic and difficult to accurately detect and judge. However, motivation can be regarded as good with enough evidence to prove that an individual’s behaviour is not “hollow altruism,” “coincidental altruism,” or “a lucky accident” (Wang & Zheng, 2014 , pp. 208). Although the result is external, it is also not easy to judge accurately. Owing to the historical limitations of behaviour evaluation, some behaviours cannot be judged as moral or wise in the short term; the social, historical, and cultural background of individual behaviours must be fully considered. Virtue has obvious individual differences; an individual’s age, role, and historical period as well as the specific situation must also be considered, to make a more accurate assessment (Wang & Zheng, 2015 ).

Wit and Virtue in Wisdom Must Be Integrated

Why is it necessary and important for wisdom to integrate virtue and wit? Virtue and wit belong to two different categories: virtue concerns values or “what should be done”, whereas wit concerns knowing or science of “what is”. The British philosopher G. E. Moore ( 1903 , pp. 8-10) argued it is a “naturalist fallacy” to define goodness by extending natural attributes from “what is” to “what ought to be”, because goodness is an attribute that is unique and non-deterministic, not something natural (Wang & Ren, 2017 ). In fact, the existence of quick-witted people with little virtue and virtuous people who are slow-witted shows that virtue and wit can be separated. People who have not developed the habit and ability to analyze, and solve problems in ways that integrate virtue and wit often fail. For example, without thinking of the right way to help the drowning person, a virtuous college student might dive into the water at the risk of drowning, without considering more effective means of rescue. But quick-witted people lacking virtue and acting with the wrong motivations may use unethical means that harm the legitimate rights and interests of others. Of course there are differing degrees of public and private virtue: sometimes wit can be divorced from private (small-scale) morality and united with public (large-scale) morality, and sometimes the reverse is true. All of this shows that virtue and wit are not necessarily integrated.

In sum, all these suggests that virtue and wit can be fully integrated only through proper wisdom education. Furthermore, because wise virtue seeks the common good, the wise integration of virtue and wit typically refers to (large-scale) public virtue. Even wise people are not perfect. It is a mistake to demand perfection and expect wise people to excel in private and public virtue and be quick-witted about everything. Confucius was not a genius in the natural sciences. Nor are individuals with both talent and wit necessarily wise, unless their virtue and wit are fully integrated. Thus, individuals who wish to become wise should develop the ability to habitually consider and solve problems from the perspective of both virtue and wit—actin in ways that promote the long-term public good.

Three researches have validated this two-dimensional structural view of wisdom: One study explored the implicit theory of a wise person. Hierarchical cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and social network analysis revealed three aspects of a wise person: virtue, competence, and achievement (Li & Wang, 2017b ). Achievement refer to the effects of wise behaviour. Therefore, from the perspective of disposition or personality, wisdom has two aspects: wit and virtue. In another study, Implicit Association Test (IAT) and Single Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) were used to explore the implicit cognition of wisdom, and the results revealed that wisdom is the integration of good moral - humane quality and high intelligence (Chen & Wang, 2014 ). The third study aimed to empirically explore the structure of wisdom in Chinese culture, and results show that wisdom is a multi-level and multi-dimensional structure, consisting of two second-order factors, namely wit and virtue, and six complementary first-order factors, including super intelligence, creative thinking rich knowledge and good motivation, good effect, good methods (Chen & Wang, 2020 ).

Types of Wisdom

In order to study wisdom thoroughly and meticulously, it is necessary to deepen the research on classification of wisdom.

Current Classifications of Wisdom

Theoretical and practical wisdom.

The Platonic Dialogues referred to three types of wisdom: (a) the contemplative or theoretical wisdom of philosophers who pursue the truth; (b) the practical wisdom of politicians and legislators, which allows them to make informed choices without passion or deception of the senses; (c) the cognitive or intellectual wisdom (episteme) of those who understand things rationally and scientifically developed by those who understand the nature of things and the principles of behaviour control (Robinson, 1989 , 1990 ; Sternberg, 1998 ).

Refining Plato’s ideas, Aristotle proposed two types of wisdom: contemplative philosophical wisdom (also called theoretikes [Sophia] ), and practical wisdom ( phronesis ). Theoretical wisdom seeks ultimate scientific and metaphysical truth. Practical wisdom uses appropriate means to appraise and deal with current situations and promotes the common good through appropriate choices (Clayton & Birren, 1980 ). In Aristotle’s view, taken up by Christian theologians, philosophical wisdom (Sophia) is the highest form of knowledge: Only God can possess such knowledge completely. Practical wisdom is judgment and behaviour/action relating to good and bad things in an individuals’ pursuit of a better life (Sternberg, 1998 ; Yang, 2008 ).

Conventional and Emergent Wisdom

Kahn ( 2005 ) divides wisdom into “conventional wisdom” and “emergent wisdom” depending on whether one is operating in a relatively normal or abnormal environment from the perspective of evolutionary psychology. Conventional wisdom refers to behavioural beliefs and norms used to promote human well-being in physical and societal environments. Conventional wisdom is often the result of education and social adaptation; as such it is often unrecognized and unconsciously influences people’s thoughts and actions. When environments can provide sustainable and stable personal benefits, wisdom that people usually use and rely on is conventional wisdom. As a result, when the natural, technological or the social environment change dramatically, people need another type of wisdom: emergent wisdom. Emergent wisdom is needed to develop new beliefs and rules for behaviours. Unlike conventional wisdom that helps people adapt to a normal environment, emergent wisdom seeks to creatively transform thinking and action. People must first take a step back from their current action to gain a broader perspective. Vision is then improved through deeper insight into the functions of various components in the field of vision. Finally, a new method must be developed that is feasible in practice (Kahn, 2005 ).

According to Kahn’s definition, wisdom refers to a set of behavioural beliefs and norms that help individuals adapt to normal or changing situations to promote human well-being. Two points with respect to Kahn’s wisdom classification require further discussion: (1) “conventional wisdom” seems like the normal application of (perhaps different kinds of) practical knowledge, but not necessarily wisdom because it lacks an important characteristic of wisdom—novelty. (2) If wisdom is categorized only according to whether behavioural beliefs and norms adapted to the environment, without reference to mental processes, the essence of wisdom is lost; it becomes easy to confuse wisdom with intelligence, since intelligence can also help individuals better adapt to changes in their environment over time.

Personal and General Wisdom

Staudinger ( 1999 , 2019 ; see also Staudinger and Glück, 2011 ) divides wisdom into “personal wisdom” and “general wisdom” based on whether they rely on first-person or third-person ontology, respectively. Personal wisdom is a person’s insight into his or her own life; that is, “the wisdom that a person shows when dealing with uncertain events and problems in his or her own life.” General wisdom is the wisdom that a person shows when dealing with general life problems of others.

On this view, wisdom, as defined by Erikson, Ardelt, and Labouvie-Vief are largely concerned with personal wisdom, whereas Neo-Piagetians, the Berlin wisdom paradigm, and Sternberg’s balanced theory are largely concerned with general wisdom. This distinction should help resolve ‘the Solomon Paradox’ (named after the biblical King Solomon) in which people are wiser when considering interpersonal conflicts of others (general wisdom), than they are their own (Grossmann & Kross, 2014 ). As the Chinese proverb says, “Spectators see the chess game better than the players.” And some wise people are good at resolving their own problems (personal wisdom) but not at advising others—as in chapter 33 of the Tao Te Ching: “He who knows much about others may be learned but he who understands himself is enlightened.”

However, these two kinds of wisdom can easily be misunderstood—“personal wisdom” is misperceived as wisdom applied to solving personal problems and “general wisdom” as wisdom applied to solving general problems (Chen & Wang, 2013 ; Wang & Zheng, 2014 , pp. 182–183)—so this important distinction needs further refinement.

Domain Generality and Depth of Wisdom

Sternberg ( 2019b ) divides wisdom into four types, based on domain generality and depth. (1) Deep domain-general wisdom is what first comes to mind when thinking about wisdom: People who can ponder complex matters deeply and comprehensively and generate deeply insightful advice across domains of inquiry. (2) Shallow domain-general wisdom generally manifests as the advice of the old to the young: People with this wisdom can generate modestly insightful advice across domains of inquiry. (3) Deep domain-specific wisdom refers to deep thinking about complex matters within a single domain of inquiry—for example, people who make wise choices about their careers, but mess up their personal lives. (4) Shallow domain-specific wisdom is superficial and modestly insightful knowledge or decisions within a single domain of inquiry.

Sternberg’s classification of wisdom resembles that of Wang and Fu ( 2017 ), who propose that wisdom can be classified based on domain generality and degree of omniscience. However, Sternberg and Wang have a different understanding of “domain-specific wisdom”. Wang’s “domain-specific wisdom” includes multiple subtypes, more specifically: (1) wisdom in specific fields (Sternberg’s domain-specific wisdom), and (2) wisdom in several specific fields (Sternberg’s domain-general wisdom). In general, Sternberg’s classification has more explanatory power because he adds the dimension of “depth”. However, Wang’s classification is more range, because of the addition of omniscient wisdom.

Humane and Natural Wisdom: A New Classification

Societal development promotes a diversity of talent; however, prevailing mainstream morality in different countries and regions is culturally universal, although some differences remain. For this reason, we propose a new classification of wisdom according to specific kind of wit referenced by wisdom: humane and natural wisdom. This classification helps to understand how these two types of wisdom develop in Eastern and Western cultures, and helps with wisdom education.

Defining Humane and Natural Wisdom

“Natural wisdom” was first proposed by Wang in 2007 in contrast to “moral wisdom” (Zheng & Wang, 2007 ). The term “moral wisdom” derives from Mencius , who said “When people have moral wisdom and practical knowledge, it is usually because they have spent a long time in difficulty/struggled for a long time” (In Chinese, Ren zhi you de hui shu zhi zhe, heng cun chen ji .). However, “natural wisdom” is the genus, and “moral wisdom” is the species, whose scope is smaller and more specific. In other words, these two concepts are not well-matched. Therefore, the pairing of “natural wisdom” and “moral wisdom” was used until the spring of 2013 (Chen & Wang, 2013 ). In his Theoretical exploration and applied research of wisdom psychology (Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p.236), Wang later proposed contrasting “humane wisdom” and “natural wisdom”.

Broadly speaking, humane wisdom is just shorthand for human wisdom which, in this paper, we simply call “wisdom”—in contrast to divine-, animal-, or artificial-wisdom (i.e., a possible future development of artificial intelligence). Narrowly construed, humane wisdom refers to a comprehensive psychological quality integrating virtue and wit, acquired through experience and practice, based on one’s intelligence and social science knowledge. As stated earlier, humane wisdom is displayed in dealing with life problems in the humanities and social sciences. According to Rosch’s ( 1975 ) prototype theory, people such as Confucius, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King are prototypical exemplars of humane wisdom (Weststrate et al., 2016 ). Typically, a person with humane wisdom is a ‘humanist sociologist’ of good moral character. Natural wisdom refers to a comprehensive psychological quality integrating virtue and wit, acquired through experience and practice, but based on an individual’s intelligence and knowledge of natural science. Einstein is a prototypical exemplar of a person with natural wisdom. Typically, someone with natural wisdom is a natural scientist of good moral character (see Paulhus et al., 2002 ). Prototypes of natural wisdom and scientific intelligence are essentially the same concept differently named (Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p. 236)—a general problem for the emerging science of wisdom, and for the social sciences more generally (Grossmann et al., 2020 ).

Relating Humane and Natural Wisdom

As two distinct types of wisdom: How are humane and natural wisdom related? On the one hand, people with a compassionate attitude and great humane wisdom are better able to probe things deeply, and therefore likely able to also develop high levels of natural wisdom. On the other hand, someone with a thorough understanding of the objective laws of nature facing complex interpersonal problems, can frame humane wisdom wthin a deep experience of those laws, rather than be limited by them (see Fig.  2 ).

Diagram of the relationship between human and natural wisdom (as adapted from Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p. 251)

Nevertheless, natural wisdom involves objective things and a person’s will and interest cannot change it. Besides, it is culturally universal and implies similar meanings in different cultures. Humane wisdom, however, is culturally specific and interindividually variable. An empirical study using mouse-tracking techniques demonstrated that natural wisdom is more strongly associated with competence rather than with virtue, while humane wisdom has a stronger association with virtue than with competence (Li & Wang, 2017a ). In another empirical study, in order to explore the classification of wisdom in the mind of laypeople, 51 participants were recruited to classify words that described wisdom on the basis of semantic similarity of words, and classify wisdom nominees on the basis of characteristic similarity of nominees (Chen & Wang, 2016 ). Results showed that, (a) semantic space of words describing wisdom included two dimensions, namely “humanities and social sciences abilities” vs “natural science and technology abilities” and “inherent qualities” vs “external performances”, and three categories, namely, talents shown in humanities, social sciences, and natural science & technology; (b) The semantic space of wisdom nominees included two dimensions, namely “natural scientists” vs “humanities and social scientists”, and “scientists engaged in intrapersonal matters” vs “scientists engaged in interpersonal matters”, and three categories, namely natural wise people, social wise people and humanities wise people (Chen & Wang, 2016 ). In conclusion, according to the characteristics of talents or abilities contained in wisdom, wisdom can be classified into two categories of humane wisdom and natural wisdom (Chen & Wang, 2016 ).

The Importance of Distinguishing Humane and Natural Wisdom

There are at least two important reasons to distinguish humane and natural wisdom. First, this distinction helps further expand and unify the field of wisdom research. Most current wisdom research—with the notable exception of Wang or Weststrate and colleagues, and a few others—mainly refer to humane wisdom and not natural wisdom. From the broader perspective, wisdom is not just about excellent moral qualities, personality traits or beneficial ways of thinking, but is closely related to professional knowledge.

Distinguishing between humane and natural wisdom generate a series of new research topics regarding the theorization, measurement, and application of wisdom. For example—allowing for the moderating effect of contextual variables like fatigue or self-distancing—measurement of humane wisdom should be relatively stable across time, space, and social situations; however, measurement of natural wisdom requires a great deal of professional expertise, so although an individual may be reflective, compassionate and well-intentioned, once out of their area of expertise, they will not exhibit natural wisdom.

Second, this distinction helps individualize teaching; as long as professional expertise and virtue are integrated, new subtypes of natural wisdom can be generated according to different wits. Thus, multiple wisdoms can be cultivated because every type of intellectual achievement can be made wise, when used for good. Although fluid intelligence is innate, other kinds of intellectual achievement are acquired (e.g., practical knowledge, effective ways of thinking, and good moral character) and provide a theoretical basis for teaching students in accordance according to their abilities.

Three Questions for Wisdom Research

Three controversial issues still need to be answered to avoid future argument/confusion in research on wisdom.

Question 1: Is Wisdom an Excellence Quality to Everyone, or a Rare Quality Possessed Only by Rare Individuals, like the Buddha?

People who hold that there is only one type and level of wisdom, inevitably see wisdom as a rare quality possessed only by those with truly great wisdom, like the Buddha or ultimately God—perhaps impossible for ordinary people to achieve (Baltes & Smith, 1990 ; Grossmann, 2017b ; Grossmann et al., 2019 ; Kramer, 2000 ). However, excepting God, even people with great wisdom, like Confucius or Newton, cannot always behave wisely everywhere and at all times. When such individuals encounter unfamiliar problems, they may exhibit very little wisdom. For example, according to the Analects of Confucius (Zhu, 2016 , p. 143), Confucius was unable to give wise advice about how to grow crops and how to garden.

The multiple wisdom view we proposed holds that there are different types and levels of wisdom (see Fig.  3 ). For example, although both Confucius and Michael Faraday had wisdom, they had different types of wisdom. And, although Confucius and Mencius both had humane wisdom, Confucius had greater wisdom than Mencius—thus Confucius is called a sage (in Chinese, sheng ren ) whereas Mencius only superior man (in Chinese, ya sheng ). The multiple wisdom view not only preserves the rare quality of great wisdom, it also provides a path for ordinary individuals potentially to acquire it. Both good moral character and wit have infinite space for development, but only when they are integrated can wisdom be generated. Although this might seem simple, wisdom is not easy to develop; many people do not engage in continuous moral cultivation, and many do not develop the habit (and corresponding skill) to coordinate reflection and problem solving. However, once an individual understands that wisdom is simply the perfect integration of virtue and wit, not something ineffable, and once they understand the diversity and levels of wisdom, they can more confidently and conscientiously practice to cultivate wisdom. Thus, although great wisdom is rare and difficult for ordinary people to achieve, it is by no means impossible (Wang et al., 2019 , pp.381–383; Wang & Zheng, 2014 , pp.260–268).

Diagram of multiple wisdom (as adapted from Wang & Zheng, 2014 , p. 261)

Question 2: Why Are People Wise Only in some Situations, but Not in all?

Answering this question requires consideration of both internal factors (domains and levels of wisdom) and external conditions.

First of all, wisdom is the confluence of people, tasks, and situations (Grossmann, 2017a ; Sternberg, 2004a ): a person who is wise in one situation is not necessarily wise in another—some people may be wiser than others, but almost no one is always wise (Sternberg, 2004a ). This suggests that the wisdom of ordinary people tends to have a certain domain specific. Both Sternberg ( 2019b )—who classified wisdom according to domain generality and depth—and Wang (Wang & Fu, 2017 )—who divided wisdom into domain-specific and omniscient—emphasize the domain of wisdom. Therefore, we propose wisdom classification should integrate Sternberg and Wang and divide wisdom into three types: domain-specific wisdom, domain-general wisdom, and omniscient/ overall wisdom. (a) Domain-specific wisdom cannot be transferred to any other domain—an individual or group may have wisdom in a few domains, but if that wisdom cannot be transferred to another domain, it is still domain-specific wisdom. (b) Domain-general wisdom refers to the wisdom that can be transferred and applied in multiple domains, but not all domains. (c) Omniscient or overall wisdom, refers to the wisdom that can be transferred and applied in all domains. Each of the three types can be further divided into two deep and shallow generating six types of wisdom (see Table  2 ).

By definition, wise people are more likely to act wisely in their areas of expertise than are novices and laypeople (Wang & Fu, 2017 ), but this relatively stable performance of wisdom may indicate trait (or trait-like) domain-specific wisdom or domain-general wisdom (Keshavan et al., 1992 ). But no matter how wise they are, individuals or groups cannot be completely wise in all situations, but will always has a certain degree of expertise or situational highly positively correlated with their expertise (Grossmann, 2017a , 2017b ). Footnote 3 In fact, any individual’s wisdom must have what Warren E. Buffett calls a “circle of competence”, beyond which the individual knows little or nothing. Warren E. Buffett’s motto is “It’s not terribly important how big the circle is. But it is terribly important that you know where the perimeter is” (Dobelli, 2013 , p. 16).

Only the Buddha, God, Allah—and their current mythical equivalent, strong artificial wisdom—have omniscient wisdom (Wang & Wei, 2018 ). In human society, most people’s wisdom is domain-specific, a few have domain-general wisdom, but it is virtually impossible for humans to be universally wise. Thus, any individual, group, or organization that confidently claims universal wisdom lacks intellectual and epistemic humility, and will eventually be shown to be foolish (Grossmann, 2017b ; Sternberg, 2004b ).

Second, an individual’s level of talent and morality can constrain their level of wisdom. Level of wisdom is limited by the level of an individual’s wit and training. A professional expert in one or more specific areas of skill will have only domain-specific or domain-general wisdom. And their level of expertise may be deep or shallow. Typical experts have relatively shallow domain-specific or domain-general wisdom, and can only easily solve complex matters in their narrow area of professional competence. However, top experts, what Dreyfus ( 2004 ) calls “masters”, with domain-specific or domain-general deep wisdom, can solve novel problems of high difficulty in their field or expertise. Of course, ‘no one is perfect’, meaning that even people with deep wisdom sometimes can also encounter insurmountable challenges in their domain of expertise. However, generally, people with deep wisdom can solve problems better and faster than those with shallow wisdom. This shows that deep wisdom is relatively more stable. In this sense, the Berlin wisdom model has a certain rationality because it regards wisdom as an expert knowledge system. At the same time, even the greatest experts are limited by the culture of their time and, confronted with a great problem that on one of their time can solve, they may not solve it either. For example, no expert has yet been able to scientifically explain the origin of the universe, or the origin of consciousness.

Level of wisdom is also limited by an individual’s virtue. Even experts with comparable levels of expertise in the same field may make different choices when confronted with the same self-interested context, owing to their different moral development. When it comes to self-interest, experts with more developed conscience will sacrifice their own interests for the benefit of the majority, which is an act of humane wisdom, though it may seem foolish to other people who are less wise. However, experts of low moral development will do things to benefit themselves and harm the public, which is an act of folly in the long run from a humanistic standpoint, but the actor may consider it wise at the time (Sternberg, 2004b ). Thus, precisely because that one’s wisdom is limited by one’s level of wit and virtue, individuals show fluctuation of wise behaviour in their field of expertise.

Third, external objective conditions can also affect individual wisdom. To be specific, if the external conditions experienced by an individual in one situation are unavailable in another one, they may not show wisdom to the same extent, or at all. For instance, when a patient on an airplane requires a complex surgery, a skilled surgeon could not perform the operation no matter how much they wanted to. Because they lack the necessary medical equipment and operating conditions.

To sum up, fluctuations of wisdom are caused by a variety of factors—the domain of wisdom, the level of wit and morality, as well as the external conditions, without any need to appeal to trait and state theory.

Question 3: Can Foolishness Transform into Wisdom, and Vice Versa?

Some people become wise in later life while they were just average or were even foolish when younger. For others it is the opposite: they seemed wise in their early life but acted foolishly later in life. Does these mean that wisdom and foolishness can transform into each other? We think it does. That is because that wisdom involves the integration of virtue and wit. Unless someone achieves a high level of moral development, people’s virtue is unstable, culturally relative, and easily affected by environment. Wit includes normal or even extraordinary intelligence (including fluid and crystallized intelligence), positive modes of thinking, and rich procedural knowledge. Among them, crystallized intelligence, thinking mode and procedural knowledge all need to be acquired through long-term education and life experience. Therefore, it is difficult for most people, except for a very few who possess a very high level of moral cultivation and wit, to maintain steady wisdom at all times. In addition, most wisdom is domain-specific, so people who act recklessly in unfamiliar territory are liable to be foolish.

About the relationship between wisdom and age, most scholars believe that wisdom becomes potentially available during adolescence and early adulthood (Brugman, 2006 ; Sternberg, 2005 ). However, the relationship between age and wisdom during adulthood remains controversial. There are four general possibilities: positive increase, decline, stability, and plateau. Among these possibilities, positive increase and decline model have less empirical support than stability and plateau (Wang & Wang, 2018 ). In other words, the relationship between wisdom and age is moderated by individual and situational differences depending upon internal factors (heredity, maturity, and subjectivity) and external factors (environment and education).

Prospects for Wisdom Research: Five Problems Worth Studying

Wisdom is an expression of the optimal human psychological development. It is a high-quality mental resource that can benefit both human society and individuals who use it. Despite its significance, the history of scientific research on wisdom is very short, only about 40 years since its beginnings in the 1970s (Weststrate & Glück, 2017 ). Looking to the future, five main issues constitute an important direction for the development of wisdom psychology research for the next 5 to 10 years.

The Biological Basis of Wisdom

Wisdom is a complex, multicomponent psychological trait that necessarily has a neurobiological basis that includes neuroanatomy, neurotransmitters, and neural circuits (Lee & Jeste, 2019 ). Speculative models of the neurobiology of wisdom have been proposed by Jeste and his colleagues (Jeste & Lee, 2019 ; Meeks & Jeste, 2009 ) and Narvaez ( 2014 ), based on the neurobiological studies related to subcomponents of wisdom and how these subcomponents are developed and engaged through culturally-inculcated moral imagination. However, these exploratory analyses are based on the study of the brain mechanism of varies components of wisdom, not explicitly purporting to measuring it (Lee & Jeste, 2019 ). Disagreement over the components of wisdom and differences in defining each component will provide important ways to study the brain mechanism of wisdom, so it is very important to identify a valid wisdom phenotypes (Narvaez, 2014 ). From our perspective, it is also important to consider whether the neurophysiological mechanisms of humane wisdom and natural wisdom reside in the same or in different parts of the brain and develop in the same way? If the latter, is there any overlap? How are the neurophysiological mechanisms of wisdom, virtue, and creativity correlated? Research on such questions may require advanced technologies, like event-related potential and functional MRI.

“Artificial Wisdom”

In an era of rapidly developing artificial intelligence (AI), researchers increasingly realize that AI necessarily incorporate values (Conn, 2017 )—what Wang and Wei ( 2018 ) call artificial wisdom (AW) incorporates communal values, which is important to what Narvaez ( 2014 ) calls “primal wisdom”. With AI’s rapid development in knowledge representation, expert systems and planning, we believe some aspects of AW can be realized (Grossmann et al., 2020 ). How can the results of wisdom research be used to help AI evolve into AW? So far, Wang and Wei ( 2018 ), Jeste et al. ( 2020 ) and one commentary about the paper by Jeste et al. (Nusbaum, 2020 ) are the only three psychological papers that have explored this issue. Among them, Developing Artificial Wisdom to Deal With the Threat of Artificial Intelligence , from Wang and Wei ( 2018 ), is the first article on AW published in the field of psychology, and firstly proposed and defined the concept of AW. According to the integrating virtue and wit theory, Wang and Wei ( 2018 ) proposed that, the AI will be updated to the AW once it obtained the integrating virtue and wit performance. The AW will use its wit to cognize and understand currently faced complicated problems correctly and timely under the guidance or inspiration of the algorithm or principle of virtue. Furthermore, the correct, novel that give the impression of flexible and ingenious, and ethical ways will be used by the AW to solve these complicated problems efficiently. Meanwhile, the AW actions will not harm the legitimate rights and interests of other people, society or mankind, in contrast to promote their welfares for a long time. In this way, theoretically, one of the best ways to prevent AI from endangering human beings is to transform AI into AW by integrating virtue and wit in its virtual moral imagination. More specifically, they proposed for the first time the “Wang’s wisdom test” to assess whether AW has been achieved. Then they divide AW into weak and strong, and discussed the possible ways to realize these two kinds of AW. However, this theoretical exploration leaves some important questions unanswered. For example, what specific rules should be followed by strong and weak AW in particular situations? What moral imagination expresses the ultimate development of strong AW? And how to be sure that AW solutions can fully integrate virtue and wit?

Accepting Wise Advice

The topic of wise advice-taking, in which individuals show wisdom by correctly weighing advice from others, has become increasingly important (Wei et al., 2019 ). History has often shown that the ability to weigh advice wisely is critical to individual or organizational success. Of course, just as important is the wise advice itself—the general wisdom involved in giving advice from a second- or third-person perspective—the very basis of wise advice-taking. The quality of the advice giving (e.g., whether the advice-giver can identify the appropriate time and method of delivery) clearly affects how easily and how well advice is accepted.

How to study wise advice-taking? A four-stage model has been proposed: (a) Dissent tolerance, allowing others to express opinions that differ from your own; (b) Accurately distinguish the differences of opinions; (c) Timely adoption of quality advice; (d) Take quick action on wise advice-taking and achieve good results for the public good. The wise advice-taking is no longer wise, if—after accepting wise advice, one sacrifices the legitimate rights and interests of most people for the benefit of oneself or one’s clique—violating the principle that wisdom requires virtue. Of course, how wise advice-taking relates to age, culture and other relevant variables also needs in-depth study.

Wisdom Development

There are three ways to explore wisdom development. The first is to explore animal wit and/or intelligence from the perspective of biological evolution. In other words, determine whether animals have wisdom, and if they do how it resembles and differs from human wisdom. Second, how does human wisdom come into being and develop from the perspective of the subject? Third, what general trajectories and laws govern the generation and development of individual wisdom? Are their stages in the development of individual wisdom? If so, are they based on the development level of post-formal operational thinking, as proposed by Loevinger ( 1966 )? These and other questions remain to be explored. To investigate the level of wisdom development, we need to develop a scale with good reliability and validity and norms to measure the development and coordination of wit and virtue in adults and children. Otherwise, researchers will be unable to effectively evaluate the quality of wisdom education and accurately determine the developmental level of wisdom of individuals and groups. All current wisdom scales only measure the conceptions and dispositions for wisdom, rather than level of wisdom. How can we create a normed scale with good reliability and validity to measure the development levels of wit and virtue in adults and children? This is an important question for future research.

Using Wisdom to Deal with Regional, National, and Global Issue of Development and Survival

As we enter the twenty-first century, the world is facing a proliferation of ultra-nationalist movements, deepening friction and conflicts among different cultures, and the rise of individualism, egotism, and excessive narcissism (e.g., Santos et al., 2017 ; Sternberg, 2018 ). Problems like Australian bushfires, the East African locust plague, and melting of Arctic glaciers and the current global pandemic of COVID-19 are problems that affect all of humanity. It is urgent for people to analyze and solve problems from the perspective of the long-term interests of the vast majority of people, that is, to analyze and solve them wisely (Maxwell, 2019 ).

Problems relating to local, national, and even global development (and survival) can be placed into two moral categories: The first are factual questions—such as whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment against COVID-19. To answer such questions, individuals and groups, especially leaders, must rely on findings that are a product of natural wisdom and adhere to a scientific that is spirit truth-seeking, humane, and responsible to society and the world. The second are issues related to different cultures. For example, Beliefs and values (e.g., making autonomy or community a prime concern), aesthetic tastes (e.g., preference for Chinese freehand brushwork in painting or Western realist painting), social rules and conventions (e.g., driving on different sides of the road), and social customs (eating with chopsticks, as in China, or eating with a knife and fork, as in the West). Individuals and groups—and especially their leaders—must demonstrate wisdom to remain humane, able to rationally discern right from wrong, promote good and combat evil, respect cultural diversity, and take effective measures that are truly benefit most people. And for all this they need humane and natural wisdom.

To conclude, after almost half a century, wisdom research is at an important juncture. A lot of important work has been done, but confusion around how to define wisdom risks fragmenting the field and making it harder to apply the findings of wisdom research to pressing global problems to improve the material and social conditions needed to optimize human flourishing. We hope our paper is a first step in an ongoing discussion of how to understand, develop, and apply wisdom to the urgent personal, national and global problems that now confront us all.

Change history

21 march 2022.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03006-0

The word “wit” in this article should be understood in its archaic sense. According to the Oxford English Dictionary , the archaic sense of wit means: “A person of great mental ability; a learned, clever, or intellectual person; a man of talent or intellect; a genius.” Although, now it is typically associated with: “Quickness of intellect or liveliness of fancy, with capacity of apt expression; talent for saying brilliant or sparkling things, esp. in an amusing way”, historically it is associated with: “good or great mental capacity; intellectual ability; genius, talent, cleverness; mental quickness or sharpness, acumen”, as well as “practical talent or cleverness; constructive or mechanical ability; ingenuity, skill”, and “wisdom, good judgement, discretion, prudence”.

From 2004 to 2007, Wang defined wisdom as an ability—specifically, a novel, ingenious ability to accurately solve complex problems, on the basis of their intelligence and knowledge, acquired through experience and practice (Wang, 2007, p.140; Zheng & Wang, 2007 ). From 2008 to 2016, Wang defined wisdom as a comprehensive psychological quality—specifically, as a combination of virtue and intellect acquired through experience and practice, based on one’s intelligence and knowledge (Chen & Wang, 2013 ; Wang & Yan, 2011 , pp. 304–314; Wang & Zheng, 2008 , pp. 261–285, 2012, 2014, p.189, 2015).

This is because, moral character, practical knowledge, and good thinking are all varied and constrained by time, background, social and cultural environment, human life span, and individual factors like IQ, education level, way of thinking, personality characteristics, physical and mental health status, and age. Accordingly, everyone is a character bundle, no one is good at everything, because no one can possess universally high levels of thinking, moral character, and practical knowledge.

Achenbaum, W. A., & Orwoll, L. (1991). Becoming wise: A psycho-gerontological interpretation of the book of job. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 32 (1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.2190/419R-X8FC-Q6NE-0M85

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aldwin, C. M. (2009). Gender and wisdom: A brief overview. Research in Human Development, 6 (1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427600902779347

Article   Google Scholar  

Ardelt, M. (2003). Empirical assessment of a three–dimensional wisdom scale. Research on Aging, 25 (3), 275–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027503025003004

Baltes, P. B., & Kunzmann, U. (2004). The two faces of wisdom: Wisdom as a general theory of knowledge and judgment about excellence in mind and virtue vs. wisdom as everyday realization in people and products. Human Development, 47 , 290–299. https://doi.org/10.1159/000079156

Baltes, P. B., & Smith, J. (1990). Toward a psychology of wisdom and its ontogenesis. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Wisdom: Its nature, origins, and development (pp. 87–120). Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Baltes, P. B., & Smith, J. (2008). The fascination of wisdom: Its nature, ontogeny, and function. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 (1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00062.x

Baltes, P. B., & Staudinger, U. M. (1993). The search for a psychology of wisdom. Current Directions in Psychological Science , Published by Cambridge University Press, 2, 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770914 .

Baltes, P. B., & Staudinger, U. M. (2000). Wisdom: A metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.122

Bassett, C. L. (2005). Emergent wisdom: Living a life in widening circles. Revision, 27 (4), 6–11.

Bassett, C. L. (2012). Wisdom and its development. In C. Hoare (Ed.), the Oxford handbook of reciprocal adult development and learning (online). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199736300.013.0082

Blatner, A. (2005). Perspectives on wisdom. ReVision, 28 (1), 29–33.

Google Scholar  

Bluck, S., & Glück, J. (2004). Making things better and learning a lesson: Experiencing wisdom across the lifespan. Journal of Personality, 72 (3), 543–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00272.x

Brown, S. C. (2004). Learning across campus: How college facilitates the development of wisdom. Journal of College Student Development, 45 , 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2004.0020

Brown, S. C., & Greene, J. A. (2006). The wisdom development scale: Translating the conceptual to the concrete. Journal of College Student Development, 47 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2006.0002

Brugman, G. M. (2006). Wisdom and aging. In J. E. Birren, K. W. Schaie, R. P. Abeles, M. Gatz, & T. A. Salthouse (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (6th ed., pp. 445–476). Academic Press.

Case, P., & Gosling, J. (2007). Wisdom of the moment: Pre-modern perspectives on organizational action. Social Epistemology, 21 (2), 87–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691720701393426

Chen, H. B., & Wang, F. Y. (2013). Wisdom: Structure, category, measurement and relationships to related variables. Advances in Psychological Science, 21 (1), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.00108

Chen, H. B., & Wang, F. Y. (2014). The experimental research on college students’ implicit cognition of wisdom. Psychological Development and Education, 4 , 363–370. https://doi.org/10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2014.04.018

Chen, H. B., & Wang, F. Y. (2016). Human Wisdom and Natural Wisdom:A Classification Based on Wisdom——descriptive Words and Wisdom Nominees. Psychological Exploration, 36 (3), 203–210.

Chen, H. B., & Wang, F. Y. (2020). An exploration on the structure of wisdom in Chinese culture. Psychological Exploration, 40 (1), 42–49.

Chen, L. M., Cheng, Y. Y., Wu, P. J., & Hsueh, H. I. (2014). Educators’ implicit perspectives on wisdom: A comparison between interpersonal and intrapersonal perspectives. International Journal of Psychology, 49 (6), 425–433.

Chen, L. M., Wu, P. J., Cheng, Y. Y., & Hsueh, H. I. (2011). A qualitative inquiry of wisdom development: Educators’ perspectives. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 72 (3), 171–187.

Clayton, V. (1975). Erikson’s theory of human development as it applies to the aged: Wisdom as contradictive cognition. Human Development, 18 , 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271479

Clayton, V. (1982). Wisdom and intelligence: The nature and function of knowledge in the later years. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 15 , 315–321. https://doi.org/10.2190/17TQ-BW3Y-P8J4-TG40

Clayton, V., & Birren, J. E. (1980). The development of wisdom across the lifespan: A reexamination of an ancient topic. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim Jr. (Eds.), Life–span development and behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 103–135). Academic Press.

Conn, A. (2017). How do we align artificial intelligence with human values? Future of life . https: //futureoflife.org/2017/02/03/align-artificial-intelligence-with-human-values/ .

Curnow, T. (1995). Wisdom, intuition and ethics . University of Lancaster.

Dobelli, R. (2013). The art of thinking clearly: Better thinking, better decision . Hodder & Stoughton Ltd..

Dreyfus, S. E. (2004). Five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society, 24 (3), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467604264992

Ferrari, M., & Alhosseini, F. (2019). Cultures differences in wisdom and conceptions of wisdom. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 409–428). Cambridge University Press.

Ferrari, M., & Kim, J. (2019). Educating for wisdom. In R. J. Sternberg, & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 347–371). Cambridge University Press.

Fu, X. R., & Wang, F. Y. (2020). Reliability and validity of an integrative wisdom scale in Chinese culture. Psychological Exploration, 40 (1), 50–57.

Glück, J., & Bluck, S. (2013). The MORE life experience model: A theory of the development of personal wisdom. In M. Ferrari & N. Weststrate (Eds.), The scientific study of personal wisdom (pp. 75–97). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7987-7_4

Grimm, S. R. (2014). Wisdom. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93 (1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2014.937449

Grossmann, I. (2017a). Wisdom in context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12 (2), 233–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616672066

Grossmann, I. (2017b). Wisdom and how to cultivate it: Review of emerging evidence for a constructivist model of wise thinking. European Psychologist, 22 (4), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000302

Grossmann, I., & Kross, E. (2014). Exploring Solomon’s paradox: Self-distancing eliminates the self-other asymmetry in wise reasoning about close relationships in younger and older adults. Psychological Science, 25 , 1571–1580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535400

Grossmann, I., & Kung, F. Y. M. (2019). Wisdom and culture. In D. Cohen & S. Kitayama (Eds.), Handbook of cultural psychology (pp. 343–364). The Guilford Press.

Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnum, M. E. W., Park, D. C., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). Reasoning about social conflicts improves into old age. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 107 (16), 7246–7250. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1001715107

Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnum, M. E. W., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2013). A route to well–being: Intelligence versus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142 , 944–953. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029560

Grossmann, I., Kung, F. Y. H., & Santos, H. C. (2019). Wisdom as state versus trait. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 249–274). Cambridge University Press.

Grossmann, I., Weststrate, N. M., Ardelt, M., Brienza, J. P., Dong, M., Ferrari, M., Fourniere, A. M., Hug, C. S., Nusbaumh, H. C., & Vervaekei, J. (2020). The science of wisdom in a polarized world: Knowns and unknowns. Psychological Inquiry, 31 (2), 103–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1750917

Hall, S. S. (2010). Wisdom: From philosophy to neuroscience . Random House of Canada Limited.

Jeste, D. V., Graham, S. A., Nguyen, T. T., Depp, C. A., Lee, E. E., & Kim, H.-C. (2020). Beyond artificial intelligence: Exploring artificial wisdom. International Psychogeriatrics, 32 (8), 993–1001. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220000927

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jeste, D. V., & Lee, E. E. (2019). The emerging empirical science of wisdom: Definition, measurement, neurobiology, longevity, and interventions. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 27 (3), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000205

Kahn, A. R. (2005). A way to wisdom: The next step. ReVision, 28 (1), 42–45.

Keltner, D., & Piff, P. K. (2020). Self-transcendent awe as a moral grounding of wisdom. Psychological Inquiry, 31 (2), 160–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1750927

Keshavan, M. S., Reynolds, C. F., Montrose, D., Miewald, J., & Kupfer, D. J. (1992). Trait-like abnormalities in the sleep of patients with psychoses. Clinical Neuropharmacology, 15 , 297A–298A. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002826-199201001-00154

Kramer, D. A. (2000). Wisdom as a classical source of human strength: Conceptualization and empirical inquiry. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19 , 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2000.19.1.83

Labouvie-Vief, G. (1990). Wisdom as integrated thought: Historical and developmental perspectives. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Wisdom: Its nature, origins, and development (pp. 52–83). Cambridge University Press.

Lee, E. E., & Jeste, D. V. (2019). Neurobiology of wisdom. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 69–93). Cambridge University Press.

Levenson, M. R., Jennings, P. A., Aldwin, C. M., & Shiraishi, R. W. (2005). Self–transcendence: Conceptualization and measurement. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 60 (2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.2190/XRXM-FYRA-7U0X-GRC0

Levin, M. (1982). The Case for torture. Newsweek (June 7, 1982).

Li, H. Q., & Wang, F. Y. (2017a). Real-time measurement of wise personality cognition: Evidence from mouse tracking. Current Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9732-3

Li, H. Q., & Wang, F. Y. (2017b). A three-dimensional model of the wise personality: A free classification perspective. Social Behavior and Personality, 45 (11), 1879–1888. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6691

Li, K., Wang, F. Y., Wang, Z. D., Shi, J., & Xiong, M. M. (2019). A polycultural theory of wisdom based on Habermas’s worldview. Culture & Psychology, 0 , 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X19877915

Loevinger, J. (1966). The meaning and measurement of ego development. American Psychologist, 21 (3), 195–206.

Maxwell, N. (2019). The urgent need for social wisdom. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 754–780). Cambridge University Press.

Meacham, J. A. (1983). Wisdom and the context of knowledge: Knowing that one doesn’t know. In D. Kuhn & J. A. Meacham (Eds.), On the development of developmental psychology (pp. 111–134). Karger.

Meeks, T. W., & Jeste, D. V. (2009). Neurobiology of wisdom: A literature overview. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66 (4), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.8

Mickler, C., & Staudinger, U. M. (2008). Personal wisdom: Validation and age-related differences of a performance measure. Psychology and Aging , 23 (4), 787–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013928

Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia Ethica . Cambridge University Press.

Narvaez, D. (2014). Neurobiology and the development of human morality: Evolution . W. W. Norton & Company.

Nayak, A. (2016). Wisdom and the tragic question: Moral learning and emotional perception in leadership and organisations. Journal of Business Ethics, 137 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2540-5

Nusbaum, H. C. (2020). How to make artificial wisdom possible. International Psychogeriatrics, 32 (8), 909–911. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220001684

Pasupathi, M., & Staudinger, U. M. (2001). Do advanced moral reasoners also show wisdom? Linking moral reasoning and wisdom-related knowledge and judgement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25 (5), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250042000519

Paulhus, D. L., Wehr, P., Harms, P. D., & Strasser, D. I. (2002). Use of exemplar surveys to reveal implicit types of intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28 , 1051–1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672022811004

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence . Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Polanyi, M. (1976). Tacit knowledge. In M. Marx & F. Goodson (Eds.), Theories in contemporary psychology (pp. 330–344). Macmillan.

Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another. (Blarney, K. trans). University of Chicago Press. (translation of Soi-Même Comme un Autre . 1990, Paris: Le Seuil).

Robinson, D. N. (1989). Aristotle’s psychology . Columbia University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Robinson, D. N. (1990). Wisdom through the ages. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Wisdom: Its nature, origins, and development (pp. 13–24). Cambridge University Press.

Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104 (3), 192–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192

Santos, H. C., Huynh, A. C., & Grossmann, I. (2017). Wisdom in a complex world: A situated account of wise reasoning and its development. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12341

Scheibe, S., Kunzmann, U., & Baltes, P. B. (2007). Wisdom, life longings, and optimal development. In J. A. Blackburn & C. N. Dulmus (Eds.), Handbook of gerontology: Evidence-based approaches to theory, practice, and policy (pp. 117–142). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Staudinger, U. M. (1999). Social cognition and a psychological approach to an art of life. In F. Blanchard-Fields & T. Hess (Eds.), Social cognition, adult development and aging (pp. 343–375). Academic Press.

Staudinger, U. M. (2019). The distinction between personal and general wisdom: How far have we come? In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 182–201). Cambridge University Press.

Staudinger, U. M., & Glück, J. (2011). Psychological wisdom research: Commonalities and differences in a growing field. Annual Review of Psychology, 62 , 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131659

Sternberg, R. J. (1998). A balance theory of wisdom. Review of General Psychology, 2 (4), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.4.347

Sternberg, R. J. (2004a). Words to the wise about wisdom? A commentary on Ardelt’s critique of Baltes. Human Development, 47 , 286–289. https://doi.org/10.1159/000079155

Sternberg, R. J. (2004b). Why smart people can be so foolish. European Psychologist, 9 (3), 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.9.3.145

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Older but not wiser? The relationship between age and wisdom. Ageing International, 30 (1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02681005

Sternberg, R. J. (2018). Wisdom, foolishness, and toxicity in human development. Research in Human Development, 15 , 200–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2018.1491216

Sternberg, R. J. (2019a). Four ways to conceive of wisdom: Wisdom as a function of person, situation, person/situation interaction, or action. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 53 , 479–485.

Sternberg, R. J. (2019b). Race to Samarra: The critical importance of wisdom in the world today. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 3–9). Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J., & Glück, J. (2019). Wisdom, morality, and ethics. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Glück (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 551–574). Cambridge University Press.

Thomas, M. L., Bangen, K. J., Ardelt, M., & Jeste, D. V. (2015). Development of a 12–item abbreviated three-dimensional wisdom scale (3D–WS–12): Item selection and psychometric properties. Assessment, 24 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115595714

Walsh, R. (2015). What is wisdom? Cross–cultural and cross–disciplinary syntheses. Review of General Psychology, 19 (3), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000045

Wang, F. Y., & Fu, X. R. (2017). Wisdom: The integrated psychological quality of virtue and talent. Chinese Social Sciences Today. (Oct. 30th, 2017).

Wang, F. Y., & Wei, X. D. (2018). Developing artificial wisdom to deal with the threat of artificial intelligence. Journal of dialectics of . Nature, 40 , 9–14. https://doi.org/10.15994/j.1000-0763.2018.04.002

Wang, F. Y., & Yan, L. S. (2011). A new look of educational psychology (3rd ed.). Jinan University Press.

Wang, F. Y., Yan, L. S., & Zheng, H. (2019). A new look of educational psychology (5rd ed.). Jinan University Press.

Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. (2008). Chinese cultural psychology (3rd ed.). Jinan University Press.

Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. (2012). A new theory of wisdom: Integrating intelligence and morality. Psychology Research, 2 (1), 64–75.

Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. (2014). Theoretical exploration and applied research of wisdom psychology . Shanghai Education Press.

Wang, F. Y., & Zheng, H. (2015). Morality and artificial intelligence integration: The essence and category of wisdom. Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences, 3 , 127–133. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-8263.2015.03.019

Wang, Y. L., & Ren, Q. H. (2017). On the anti-realism of morality and its logic of argumentation. Morality and Civilization, 5 , 146–151. https://doi.org/10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2017.05.003

Wang, Y. L., & Wang, F. Y. (2018). Older and wiser? The relationship between wisdom and age among adults. Advances in Psychological Science, 26 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01

Webster, J. D. (2003). An exploratory analysis of a self–assessed wisdom scale. Journal of Adult Development, 10 (1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020782619051

Webster, J. D. (2007). Measuring the character strength of wisdom. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 65 (2), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.2190/AG.65.2.d

Webster, J. D., Bohlmeijer, E. T., & Westerhof, G. J. (2014). Time to flourish: The relationship of temporal perspective to well-being and wisdom across adulthood. Aging & Mental Health, 18 (8), 1046–1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2014.908458

Webster, J. D., Weststrate, N. M., Ferrari, M., Munroe, M., & Pierce, T. W. (2017). Wisdom and meaning in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 6 (2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696817707662

Wei, X. D., Xu, W. T., & Wang, F. Y. (2019). Wise reasoning: Concept, measurement, influence factors and future research. Journal of Psychological Science, 42 (2), 343–349. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20190213

Weststrate, N. M., Ferrari, M., & Ardelt, M. (2016). The many faces of wisdom: An investigation of cultural-historical wisdom exemplars reveals practical, philosophical, and benevolent prototypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42 , 662–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216638075

Weststrate, N. M., & Glück, J. (2017). Hard–earned wisdom: Exploratory processing of difficult life experience is positively associated with wisdom. Developmental Psychology, 53 (4), 800–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000286

Yang, S. Y. (2001). Conceptions of wisdom among Taiwanese Chinese. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32 , 662–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032006002

Yang, S. Y. (2008). A process view of wisdom. Journal of Adult Development, 15 (2), 62–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-008-9037-8

Yang, S. Y. (2013). Wisdom and good lives: A process perspective. New Ideas in Psychology, 31 , 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.03.001

Yang, S. Y. (2016). Exploring wisdom in the Confucian tradition: Wisdom as manifested by fan Zhongyan. New Ideas in Psychology, 41 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2015.11.001

Yang, S. Y. (2017). The complex relations between wisdom and significant life learning. Journal of Adult Development, 5 , 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-017-9261-1

Zhang, H. T., Huang, J. H., Huang, C. L., Wang, W., & Hu, C. (2019). Are wise men necessarily benevolent? A reflection upon the relationship between wisdom and virtue. Journal of Psychological Science, 42 (3), 461–467. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20190336

Zheng, H., & Wang, F. Y. (2007). On the essential types and cultivation methods of wisdom. Jiangxi Educational Research, 5 , 10–13. https://doi.org/10.16477/j.cnki.issn1674-2311.2007.05.003

Zhu, X. (2016). The chapter variorum of the four books . Zhonghua Book Company.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31971014).

Author information

Kaili Zhang and Juan Shi contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Institute of Moral Education Research & School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, No. 122 Ninghai Road, Gulou District, Nanjing, 210097, People’s Republic of China

Kaili Zhang & Fengyan Wang

Normal College, Qingdao University, No. 16, Qingdao First Road, Shinan District, Qingdao, Shandong, 266071, People’s Republic of China

Department of Applied Psychology & Human Development, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1V6, Canada

Michel Ferrari

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fengyan Wang .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests.

The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their authorship or the publication of the article.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable.

Informed Consent

Data availability statement, additional information, publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original vision of this article has been revised. The right affiliation of Fengyan Wang and Juan Shi has been corrected.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Zhang, K., Shi, J., Wang, F. et al. Wisdom: Meaning, structure, types, arguments, and future concerns. Curr Psychol 42 , 15030–15051 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02816-6

Download citation

Accepted : 27 January 2022

Published : 05 February 2022

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02816-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Humane wisdom
• Natural wisdom
• Artificial wisdom
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Essay on Knowledge for Students and Children

500+ words essay on knowledge.

Knowledge is understanding and awareness of something. It refers to the information, facts, skills, and wisdom acquired through learning and experiences in life. Knowledge is a very wide concept and has no end. Acquiring knowledge involves cognitive processes, communication, perception, and logic. It is also the human capacity to recognize and accept the truth. Knowledge can be used for positive as well as negative purposes. Thus knowledge can create and destroy at the same time. One may use knowledge for personal progress as well as the progress of the community, city, state, and nation. Some may use it for negative purposes that may not only harm individuals but can also harm the community.

Importance of Knowledge

* Knowledge is a success – In today’s world without education and the power of knowledge, it is not possible to succeed in life or even keep up with the fast-paced life. It is not just enough to have knowledge on a particular subject to succeed but it is also important to have knowledge about how to use it effectively to succeed. One should have knowledge about various aspects of a subject.

* Personal Development- Knowledge can last for a lifetime and it impacts our growth which influences everything in our life from relationships to work. Knowledge is important for personal growth and development . We can gain knowledge on everything that we find interesting like any dance form, art, architecture, history or just about anything for our personal development. It makes us wise enough to independently make our decisions in life. But it is important to adopt a positive mindset to become a constant learner only then it helps us progress and achieve our goals.

* Knowledge solves problems – problems in life which can be solved with the power of knowledge. Knowledge sharpens our skills like reasoning and problem-solving . A strong base of knowledge helps brains function more smoothly and effectively. We become smarter with the power of knowledge and solve problems more easily.

* Everyday Life- Knowledge is important and useful in day to day events. For example, if I have to buy air tickets online, I need to have knowledge about the various sites and their discounts, their terms & conditions or like online banking. If I don’t have knowledge then I end up paying more. So gaining knowledge is a constant process and is useful every single day.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

The process to increase knowledge

Open-Minded- We always learn something new by building on the knowledge that we have. We must always be open to accepting knowledge or information from anywhere we get. It may be from books, virtual media, friends, etc. To move on from one step to another we need to know more. Like in school we start from LKG, KG and then move on to 1st standard, 2nd standard and so on. It builds a strong base.

Reading Magazines- Reading helps to decode text and improves fluency to pronounce the speech sounds clear. Reading gives an idea about different topics and different views about them. One can get the actual global knowledge. Apart from that one can learn many new terms and phrase.

Communication- Shared knowledge allows you to communicate. Shared knowledge is important for communicating and understanding each other. When we discuss a certain topic with classmates, friends or relatives they have certain knowledge about it. So through communication, we get new ideas, facts and develops our knowledge. We can also identify what have we learned and what still we don’t know that helps us to clear our doubts later.

Watch documentaries or educational videos-  Discovery Channel, for example, provides excellent documentaries that keep you engaged. If you don’t like reading, this is an excellent alternative to getting your daily dose of knowledge while still relaxing in your couch!

The more knowledge we have the more power we possess. It is important for our personal and professional development and leads us to achieve success in life. Knowledge helps us in several ways but the best part is that it helps us understand ourselves as well as those around us better. It also helps us act wisely in different situations

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Why “Wisdom Work” Is the New “Knowledge Work”

• Chip Conley

AI technologies create less demand for human knowledge — and they put a premium on human wisdom.

Today the workforce is getting older, and the number of younger workers in positions of senior management is growing. These two developments might appear to spell trouble, in that they seem to set the generations against one another, but the author of this article argues that in fact they represent an important opportunity: If companies can figure out how to enable the intergenerational transfer of the wisdom that comes with age and experience, they can strengthen themselves — and the workplace as a whole.

We’re in the midst of two enormous demographic shifts in the workplace that seem to be at odds with each other. We’re living longer and working longer — either by choice or necessity. In the last century, the 65+ age group has grown five times faster than the rest of the population and, by 2031, according to a recent Bain & Co. estimate , employees 55 and older will constitute a quarter of the global workforce. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, nearly half of the increase in the number of people participating in the U.S. labor force between 2016 and 2026 is attributable to those 60 and older.

• Chip Conley is a hospitality-industry maverick, a New York Times  bestselling author, and the founder and CEO of the Modern Elder Academy , the world’s first midlife wisdom school.    

Partner Center