In coming to terms with ones own existence it is obvious that not all are created equal and even individuals belonging to the same species, race, nationality, and family group display a difference between each other- not only on a purely physical level [height, weight, strength, speed] but on a mental one as well [intelligence, wisdom, knowledge, logic] - as to make the very notion of egalitarianism, a naïve idealists dream of a possible perfect utopia. Only the very optimistic amongst us still holds on to this antiquated idea of human parity and most recognize that nature is about progress through inequality, even though we may agree that a supposed facade of equality, under the rule of law, is necessary for civilization to proceed without conflict. {Some would say that the mental characteristics of a person, I mention above, are just another aspect of their physical being, but that is a topic for another time and I will not deal with materialism or human duality here.} It is easy to just explain mental inequality as just being an expression of a qualitative variation of intelligence or knowledge but that is a simplistic interpretation that does not take into account all the aspects of mental processes that participate in creating judgment and wisdom. I am sure many of us know many “smart” people with many diplomas and labels of heightened intellectualism whom nevertheless seem to fall into childish errors or that behave in immature, irresponsible ways on such a consistent, predictable manner as to make us wonder how this is possible at all. Also the disparity of opinion between people of like mental ability and similar general experiences, coming from common cultural and social backgrounds raises the question as to how comparable minds can posses such diversely opposed views and perceptions. It is reasonable to assume that minds with relatively equal abilities using logic and having access to the same general information would come to common answers and a broad unanimity should be possible. At first glance this phenomenon can be understood by taking into consideration the distinction of perspective by which each individual perceives reality. Since self is the only thing we can ever know for certain-if that- all other perceptions become a matter of subjective interpretation based on genetic predisposition and environmental infections. Logic itself becomes malleable in areas where experience based knowledge is non-existing or feeble such as when dealing with abstract ideas. But what does perspective really mean and what are its effects on human judgment and opinion? This is a question that if answered would shed light into the human psyche, explain the diversity of opinion in the world and enable us to deduce which opinion is more respectable, worthy of further consideration, objective and which is superficial, naïve, subjective and most probably erroneous. This is important, in my view, because we as mortal beings have so little time to formulate opinions; we cannot afford to waste it chasing after impossibilities or diverting our attentions to theories that are baseless and improbable except in instances where we wish to practice our imaginations. {Important, that is, only for those interested in finding truth/reality and not for those just looking for comfort and safety to escape into and then scrambling to find justifications for doing so] The quality of an opinion is not only the product of intelligence utilizing knowledge but an end result of a series of interlocking, interdependent psychological characteristics of the human animal and the effects of the psyche and environment, it exist in, upon it. Intelligence is unquestionably vital and knowledge/information is essential in forming correct assumptions, but equally critical is an individuals personal experiences that shape judgment [first hand knowledge] and the fortitude of character [intellectual courage] to deal with many of the perceptions we may be exposed to and accept them. The level we rise to in the categories of intelligence, knowledge, experience and courage- either through genetic chance or personal effort- sets up a level of awareness called wisdom which is the base on which judgment rests. In generally encapsulating my position thus far I have deduced that: INTELLIGENCE fed on KNOWLEDGE prejudiced by EXPERIENCE and COURAGE creates a mental disposition called WISDOM which gives birth to JUDGMENT which expresses itself through OPINIONS. It would be helpful to analyze each of these pieces of our mental puzzle separately in order to understand them better and explain how one supports and influences the other. INTELLIGENCE Intelligence is a term most often used to refer to the minds analytical ability and its overall talent to deduce or induce effectively, given the information at its disposal. It is a tool of reasoning which requires knowledge to reason by and experience to form logical rules and standards in order to measure reality with. But intelligence alone is not enough to come to any correct conclusions unless it has access to dependable information through the senses or through indirect accounts and if it manages to maintain its clarity by avoiding the corruptive influences of emotion and ego that often divert its energies and cloud its focus. Like a sculptors knife intelligence can facilitate an artist’s work with its sharpness but is not enough, in and of itself, to give rise to great art unless handled with a keen eye, a creative imagination, talent and a subtle hand. This most precious of all human weapons has been often misconstrued and misidentified as being merely an accumulation of knowledge and the memorization and regurgitation of ideas. Ironically intelligence becomes more pronounced and important where there is an absence of knowledge and where information is shady and weak. It is in ignorance that it reveals its real power and displays how it has enabled man to become a dominating life form on Earth. KNOWLEDGE It is said that real knowledge is impossible and that all we have is sensual interpretations of presumably external, ephemeral phenomenon of which we can never be completely certain of. Despite this, these sensual events are all we possess -other than the awareness of self- and a first absolute assumption of a priori knowledge is a necessity if any further progress can be attempted. The problems of perception are many and furthermore the weakness of our senses, even in comparison to other living beings, is well known to most of us, but the requirement of these sensual events, for the mind to formulate opinion, is unquestionable and fundamental. Man attempts to circumvent this starting problem of uncertainty by utilizing the process of elimination through a comparison of sensual interpretations by different individuals, in diverse environments coming from a multitude of cultural backgrounds. This plurality of views on a single subject manages to filter out the majority of falsehood and subjectivity but does not eliminate it totally. Individual, social/religious, gender based, historical, racial contaminations may be eliminated in this manner but our species prejudices remain until we discover another intelligent species willing to give us another perspective to test our own. Since certainty is virtually impossible as to what is real and what unreal we can, at the very least, achieve through empiricism a position of relative certainty within a reasonable constant doubt. There are presumably two types of knowledge: a priori and a posteriori but more importantly knowledge is only as dependable as the source it comes from. If sensual experience based knowledge is questionable then knowledge that has come through second or third party experiences and accounts is much more so. If intelligence is a sculptor’s knife or chisel then knowledge is his clay or rock. EXPERIENCE Some would say that experience is another term for knowledge and so must be included as just a sensual perception of events, but I will deal with experience here from a purely psychological perspective and show how a richness or poverty of first-hand experience based knowledge influences judgment. It is, in my opinion, a human unfortunate trait that most individual minds learn primarily from personal mistakes and successes and not so much from another’s. No matter how many second-hand examples we are given or third-hand accounts we are exposed to, a human mind cannot understand an experience as fully or as deeply as when it goes through it itself. This inability to empathically learn through third party experiences makes experience itself fundamental in the development of character and consequently judgment, since it determines a person’s general outlook on existence and creates a history from which strength and confidence can be drawn. Furthermore the types of experiences a mind is exposed to during its lifetime and especially during the early years, affects the overall quality of the mind and shapes the perspective from which it perceives. For example, a person that has gone through negative, life threatening, traumatic experiences will be prone to be overly pessimistic, depressive, bitter and cynical while a mind lacking any such comparative negative experiences will tend to be naïve, superficial, overly-optimistic, demanding, selfish, arrogant and self-centered. A man that has never tasted defeat will assume he cannot be defeated and will exhibit the arrogance of one that has never been humbled. A man living a sheltered privileged life will undoubtedly remain an intellectual adolescent full of insecurities and expectations. [Here is a symptom that reveals the ailment of western civilization] How, if and to what extent an experience affects judgment and character is somewhat determined by the individuals strength of character and ability to cope with diversity which is something that is mostly inherited. COURAGE Unavoidably human intelligence is guided and infected with emotion and ego. Our predispositions to a phenomenon due to past events and genetic history influence our general perception of it. If our overall perception is positive we will be inclined to be more open to it whereas if negative we will try to deny, explain it away or ignore it. Similarly ego influences judgment by placing selfish concerns and personal perceptions on intellectual pedestals. [This is one of the reasons we are unable to learn through second party experiences]. A healthy ego will always perceive self as superior and the other as inferior even if it will at times admit to some inferiorities and inadequacies in order to appear to itself and to others as fair, objective, humble and reasonable [social indoctrination]. More often than not the need for self acceptance is interpreted by the insecure ego as self-love [love is always blind to truth] which justifies an unearned egotism and arrogance. What is needed here is the ability to extricate oneself from perception thusly eliminating the control of both ego and emotion on judgment. This of course is almost humanly impossible to do completely- no matter how fervently eastern philosophies claim to be able to- but the degree of selflessness we achieve in formulating opinion determines our accuracy. The first and most important ingredient in extricating oneself from the subject being evaluated is courage; it is the sum of the strength of character and intellectual honesty that enables the mind to accept as true the perceptions that are detrimental to it and to accept the limits and weaknesses by first acknowledging their existence. Self awareness and self-acceptance is the first stage towards a general full awareness; this is only possible through the admittance of ones failings and strengths with no exaggeration either way. Courage is just as important as intelligence and knowledge in creating sound judgment. It makes it possible to perceive what is, as much as is humanly possible, without being thwarted by what we wish there to be or what we hope there is. Intellectual honesty through courage is often overlooked when assessing the ingredients of good judgment; it is the one thing that can turn an intellectual into just another babbling fool adorned with diplomas and titles of achievement but acting only as a surrogate mouthpiece for old ideas, either afraid to challenge preconception and institutions or unable to go beyond the work of others. CONCLUSION Intelligence, knowledge, experience and courage are interlocked, mutual dependant aspects of what we term wisdom. This predisposition to possibility without succumbing to imagination and instinct allows the mind to be open to new hypothesis without wasting time on improbable, illogical, delusional supposition. Wisdom focuses the human mind upon probability and eliminates the thinning of human energies on infinite possibility; it does not deny or exterminate any theory but evaluates importance and widens the level of perspective multiple views. Through this process human judgment is shaped and its accuracy is determined by how high or low we measure-up on the scales of intelligence, knowledge, experience and courage. The opinions that spring out from our judgment are, inevitably, ones whose consequences we must live with. Whether we run from truth/reality or ignore it is irrelevant; we cannot escape it. No religion, mythology, philosophy or ideology can protect us forever from reality, they can only postpone our suffering or placate its horrible effects by inebriating us or anesthetising our sensual perceptions. The only one real way to deal with truth and reality is to face it. How accurate our opinions are is relevant in the amount of negatives we are exposed to in the course of our lifetime. How often we are disappointed or surprised by reality; how often we blame others for our own failings and try to escape into fantasy is a good way to measure how reliable our judgment is. At first the price of awareness may be one we are unwilling to pay and the negativity and loss of stability, comfort and ego may be terrifying to contemplate but through its acceptance real strategies can be formulated to overcome the negatives. The power of self-awareness and acceptance of reality as it appears will always lead to long lasting contentment in the end if it is utilized correctly. “You gotta go through hell to get to heaven” as the song says.
Wow, there are some interesting ideas, I think it’s absolutely rubbish, but it’s phrased rather elegantly. Oh it would have been a lot better if it was a tad shorter my eyes are still tearing. How can you be sure of all this though you talk as if its something that’s plainly obvious what type of education have you gotten that makes your take on wisdom, more accurate then that of the next guy. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The fact that you place education above experience exposes you. The world teaches you, books only teach you other people’s experiences. Now what is more valuable first hand or second hand experiences? A METAPHOR If we are lost in a desert of life searching for an oasis then whether we find this oasis on our own or if someone by chance passes by and takes us there determines if we earn our place there or not. It doesn’t matter if this oasis has been discovered by others before you and you are a latecomer there, it is the uniqueness of your personal journey there that matters even if the conclusion is shared. If we find the oasis on our own we will forever be able to trace our steps back there and we will know every rock every twist and turn of the road we took, if we are taken there by others then if left in the desert again we will not be able to find our way back and we will never know the value and the details of the journey there. My experiences with mentors and education has been like reading a fellow journey-mans journal. I can marvel at the road he/she took and I can even share in the final destination but the road I’ve taken will be forever unique to me if I walk it on my own, making my perspective genuine and valuable to all that hear of it. In keeping with the metaphor I say that philosophy for me is like a cold lake in the middle of this metaphorical oasis. To jump in demands a shock to your system caused by the temperature difference. The cold waters can cause heart failures to the weak and the discomfort of the sudden shock can make you flee in horror back up on the surrounding hot sands if you are weak willed but if you grit your teeth and can withstand the first shock the following coolness is wonderful in comparison to the hot, dry sand dunes others exist on. In water one looses some mobility but in compensation gains a further dimension, one of depth. Those on the surrounding hard sand may be able to walk to and fro more easily and quicker but they will never know the dark and wondrous treasures hidden beneath the lake surface, they will never kinow the abyss. You need to jump in and withstand the shock to get to the depths. You need to know how to swim. Most of humanity is lost in the desert, they will live and die in the heat of nothingness and bareness and they will never quench their thirst. Others will find passing caravans and jump on and be taken to their destination and so they will never fully comprehend it. The very few, the minority will bleed and suffer on their own before they find their own way to the oasis and so they will know it and comprehend it the best. But I'm not certain. I am forever skeptical and this is why I need to test my perspective against that of others. But it is MY perspective, paid through my own suffering and earned through effort and that makes it more valuable than a perspective bought in school and adopted from another’s mind.
What sufferings may those be what experiences shaped your opinions? About your thoughts on books it might not be so, they aren't only there to compare your journey to they are like stepping stones through time. we are mortal and can only relies so much in our life time what we do relies we publish for future generations so that they can either add on to our ideas or fuse them with the ideas of others to produce something completely new without Aristotle there wouldn't have been Locke. At least that is what I believe. One more thing that isn't really related to this but, the strange arrogance 'intelligent' people tend to get it seems terribly sinful. What rights have we to claim certain things as true to argue with each other there is so much out there to know and percentage wise we know absolutely none of it. People as a whole seem to be so bold I don't understand? Do you find people interesting? Funny aren't they, well we, we are so confusing yet perfectly predictable machines shaped by factors outside our control.
My suffering is my own and only expressed openly to my intimate loved ones. It is this pain and my endurance of it that has shaped me and made me who I am. Wisdom is always a product of struggle and diversity and those that survive the most suffering and are exposed to the most diversity tend to be the most wise whereas those that live sheltered privileged lives tend to be the most shallow and naïve. It is one of those unfortunate things about life. People are fascinating. I have spent decades watching their behavior and analyzing them and now I believe I understand them quit well. In order to understand your questions you should first read Nietzsche after you’ve read Schopenhauer and the pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, especially Democritus. What rights have we? You ask. The rights given to us by being human, by being conscious. Man is the measure of all things. A powerful mind isn’t told what truth is, even if it exists which it doesn’t, the superior mind creates truth, it is the creator and destroyer and it is the epitome of free-will. A powerful mind that has the courage to stand alone and be a free-spirit lives according to its own rules and determinations. The universe is us and we are the universe, therefore what we say is truth, becomes truth. If we cannot shape our own destiny then we are nothing.
A historic understanding of a topic is not often necessary for a current understanding of a topic. Hence we might see a statement as this as hiding behind a front of 'apparent' wisdom. Hope I used enough difficult and vague words.
I have read all of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer’s works that I could get my hand on and many other different philosophers but I fear that many of their ideas seem to slip over my head. It’s probably my age and lack of general experience in this field of study but after reading over the same work again and again I get glimmers of things I missed before. ( you wrote a book? about what? ) Another thing you have made an enemy of a rather pleasant person which is not a wise thing to do maybe an apology is in order for insulting him. No one likes to be insulted that’s why he is being quit nasty to you if you look at his other posts to people that don't attack his character and intellect you can see he really does have interesting ideas that might help you along on your journey.
My book is available for free on my web-page but it is also for sale on amazon. It is just a essays about various sumbjects with no single focus but a single spirit. As for this wounded pleasent person I have no idea who you are refering to. you can choose your mentors and friendsand let me choose mine. Those with soft skins need to thicken them. In life you either become a broken heartor a gold plated one.
Alright do as you will, but nothing is as black or white as you make it out to be. Tell me more about your essays. On second though I’ll just go read them later are there any on human nature? Do you analyse people as in just watch them and try to get bits of information about them from what you see? Would you mind much if I tried to analyse you? I’m new at this so if you allow it will you correct me if I’m way off?
alright wanderer finally done the observation stage,the going through all your posts and reading them looking for itty bitty facts, sorry i took centuries. i'm going to start writing the actual report but it will be pretty long and i'll send it by e-mail. k? (oh,constructive critisism is welcome but don't be to harsh this is only my 19'th one. I'm not easly angered but when i am its best to duck and run for cover.)
Do your best. The day I fear the criticism and judgment of my lesser is the day I find my equal. Perhaps you will find my cutting eye just as uncomfortable as you describe yours. But that does not mean that you’ll be right. I’ll tell where you are right and why. But your fascination with me, personally, is more interesting than what you will have to say about me.
Your lesser? Oh well im somewhat used to your arrogance after all those posts. my fixation on you is simply an attempt to understand people and because studying everyone at the same isn't possible I choose who ever catches my eye and study them, namely you. Eventually after analyzing enough people I will draw a conclusion and compare it with psychology texts. One question do you ever regret anything you post?
No because it is me. I regret nothing about myself. I’ve accepted my weaknesses and strengths as they are. I try to better myself but I don’t harp on my failings because I know that no matter how bad I may be there is always someone worse than me. I’ve concluded that despite my many weaknesses and my many limitations as a human being, that I’m pretty superior to the vast majority of humanity. Why? Because I realize them and do something about them if I can or I accept them as part of whom I am if I can’t. My mind is not something I regret. It has been a wonderful tool that serves me well. The only thing I regret is in how I present my views sometimes to people that are hurt and insulted by them. But I cannot be held accountable for the insecurities and weaknesses of others. I share your fascination with human beings and I'm sure you won’t mind if I infer things about you through your opinions of me. Is it not true that opinions and beliefs say a lot about what a persona is?
