Who is your nominee for wise person?

Who is your nominee for wise person?

Some consider that wisdom is “seeing life whole”

John Henry Newman wrote that the pursuit of knowledge will "draw the mind off from things which will harm it," and added that it will renovate man's nature by rescuing him "from that fearful subjection to sense which is his ordinary state."

Modern parents and students want universities and colleges to focus on matters of importance; how to get a good job. It seems that few recognize that education has an extrinsic and an intrinsic value. The extrinsic value is contained within the fact that a practical education is the key to making a better living.

What is the intrinsic value of learning? Why study history or literature or religion? Of what value is philosophy? Why study logic or how to think when I only care about learning how to build a bridge? Of what value is it for me to become a critically self-conscious thinker?

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

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

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

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

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

How do I ‘get ready’ for becoming wise?

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

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

Winston Churchill is my nomine for wise man. He was an accomplished painter, he was a historian with many books to his credit, and he was accomplished broadly in practical intellection as he demonstrated in his political career.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Churchill?

"I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes."

I think compassion needs must accompany intellect to qualify for wisdom.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is compassion a necessary condition for wisdom? If so, what degree is required? Is not everyone compassionate to someone? Do you think anyone qualifies as wise?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Intellect without compassion is not wisdom, it is computing.

Sure I think Gandhi qualifies as wise, as does Gautama Buddha, Asoka, Akbar.

In modern times, I vote for Abul Kalam and Manmohan Singh, also Baba Amte

 

J. Krishnamurti

 

“If you wish to see the truth, then hold no opinion for or against.”

"Religions of the past were all life-negative and masochistic, teaching that sorrow and suffering are great virtues. A laughing religion, a religion that accepts life in its totality is yet to be born. And it is good that old religions are dead, and that along with them the old God, the God of our concepts, is also dead."

Acharya Rajneesh, A.K.A. Osho

 

Intelligence without compassion is intellect. The unification of intelligence and compassion is called wisdom.

 

I was actually just wondering if you liked Gandhi. I know you are Indian, you must be Hindi? Hindi background? You nominate a Buddha, so you are buddist? I just ask because other Indians I have met, hate Gandhi"G".

I too like Asoka, however his "understanding" did not really come from "study" he obtained it the best way, experience. I respect that he turned himself around so radically, that is a rare thing.

I nominate Socrates, though I disagree with some of his teachings, I just love his seemingly fearlessness(akin to Gandhi) and the way he just did not care that Greeks could not contend with his profound ideas.

 

She is Muslim, and most Indians I met consider Gandhi a hero.

 

Wow most muslims hate him that I met.

 

wise person....hmmm....Einstein

 

I can see why they would, I suppose.

 

Einstein had a perspective of the external world way better than most people. I believe that is Einstein would have concentrated that energy for knowing his inner-self, instead of knowing the external world. He would have been bigger than Gautama or Jesus.

But he wasn´t, Einstein was intelligent, smart, but not wise.

 

What makes you draw that conclusion?

"The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism." - Albert Einstein

 

The external world or just the portion that grabbed his attention?

 

Yes, that is common sense, I swear I draw that same conclusion myself earlier in my life. You can call it intuition, past life knowledge, whatever. But that is intelligence.
If Einstein would have perfected meditation instead of physics, I believe he would have been the wisest person we have ever heard of.

It is just the same old confusion between wisdom and intelligence.

 

Well look up Einstein's brain on the internet(yep i'm serious). There is a strong argument that it was pretty much geared up for the serious physics he engaged in.

 

What I'm curious about is:
1.) What makes you so sure he didn't perfect meditation? Just because he wasn't famous for it? He was pretty vague and private about his personal, religious and spiritual beliefs. Just because someone does not choose to be a Bodhisattva, that does not necessarily imply they have not been unbound.
2.) Do you think that one who has not perfected meditation is not wise?

 

Well, if you put it that way, it would be the portion that grabbed his attention. But that is external, trying to understand the world around you. If you try to understand the Universe by studying astronomy or physics, then you are far off base.

"So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them."
(Genesis 1, 27)

"I am not separate from anything. "I am that which is." That is, I am Brahma, and Brahma is everything. But being in an illusionary world, I am surrounded by certain appearances that seem to make me separate. So I will proceed to mentally state and accept that I am all these illusions. I am my friends, -- and then I went to them in general and in particular. I am my enemies; then I felt them all. I am the poor and the wicked; I am the ignorant. Those moments of intellectual gloom are the moments when I am influenced by those ignorant ones who are myself. All this in my nation. But there are many nations, and to those I go in mind; I feel and I am them all, with what they hold of superstition or of wisdom or evil. All, all is myself. Unwisely, I was then about to stop, but the whole is Brahma, so I went to the Devas and Asuras [gods and demons]: the elemental world, that too is myself. After pursuing this course awhile I found it easier to return to a contemplation of all men as myself. It is a good method and ought to be pursued, for it is a step toward getting into contemplation of the All. I tried last night to reach up to Brahma, but darkness is about his pavilion."
William Q. Judge

By understanding ourselves, we understand the mysteries that are hidden to us by the reality created in our minds.

An example is how Jesus thought that the Earth is plane, if someone would have come to him and told Him that the Earth was a sphere, then he would have said: "Ok, the Earth is a sphere". But that would have made no difference for Him, mystics are not interested in Earthly objects or physics.
Enlightened persons are always right about matters of divine wisdom, the physical objects of this realm, make no difference at all.

 

1) I have no doubt that he would have become Enlightened if that is the case. And he was not enlightened. Einsteing focused his knowledge on Earthly things, society, cultures, all worldy. It makes no difference, as a matter a fact, even if we owe a lot of physic knowledge to Eintein, it also opened the path to the creation of nuclear weapons.

2) You do not need to perfect meditation to become wise, there are levels of wisdom, the same as there are levels of everything, including meditation.