Is there a path to wisdom?

[coberst]

Is there a path to wisdom?

How can I know what I do not know? How can I trace that boundary between knowledge and ignorance?

In the dialogue “Apology” Plato writes about Socrates while in the dungeon just before drinking the hemlock that the citizens of Athens condemned him to be executed.

In the dungeon shortly before drinking from the hemlock cup Socrates spoke to his followers. He spoke about the accusations against him at the trial. He said that the sworn indictment against him was “Socrates is guilty of needless curiosity and meddling interference, inquiring into things beneath Earth and in the Sky…”

Socrates further adds that he is accused of teaching the people of Athens, to which Socrates vehemently denies that he is a teacher. He points out that in matters of wisdom he has only a small piece of that territory; the wisdom that he does have is the wisdom not to think he knows what he does not know. Socrates conjectures that he has the wisdom to recognize the boundary of his present knowledge and to search for that knowledge that he does not have. “So it seems at any rate I am wiser in this one small respect: I do not think I know what I do not.”

For Socrates a necessary component of wisdom is to comprehend what one is ignorant of.

Am I wise? Do I know what I am ignorant of? I certainly know that I am ignorant of astronomy and music. There are many things about which it is obvious to me that I am ignorant of. Are there things about which I am not even aware of my ignorance? Are there matters about which I think I am knowledgeable of but which I am, in fact, ignorant of?

When I ask myself these questions I become conscious of a great number of things about which I am ignorant. Does this mean I am like Socrates in this matter? I do not think so. Socrates is speaking about two types of ignorance about which most people are unconscious of.

I think that Socrates is speaking of our ‘burden of illusion’. People are unconscious of the superficiality of much that they think they know and they are unconscious of a vast domain of knowledge that is hidden from the non critical thinker.

The uncritical mind has no means for discovering these illusions. CT (Critical Thinking) is the keystone for discovering these illusions. The Catch-22 here is how can one develop a critical mind when they are deluded into thinking they have a critical mind?

When our educational system has not taught our citizens how to think critically how can our citizens ever pull themselves out of this deep hole of illusion?


“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble; it’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so”—Mark Twain

coberstakaDutchuncle

[Uberzensch]

You cannot know what you don't know you don't know, because you don't know it!

[RichardHresko]

Why only a path to wisdom?

Can anyone seriously believe there is only one way?

Further, there are two separate problems in knowing -- one epistemological (how do I know something?), and the other metaphysical (what exactly is there to know?).

I don't think you even have the right question, so I have doubts of finding a good answer.

[blazeofglory]

The one and only path to wisdom is to be natural, to take a natural course, to follow your instincts, to forestall all artificialities and forgo all that goes against nature.

To be oneself is the path to wisdom.

We are misled in this world, and our values, beliefs, desires, thoughts, imaginations are shaped and molded by others. Others induced values we live by in life.

[V.Jayalakshmi]

The path to wisdom is through experience.One was a small minded person with prejudices.But when in dire need one was given alms of love by the prejudiced.One changed after that and knew love, universal love and acknowledged that all were but hues.Here experience taught one what knowledge and readings did not teach.

[coberst]

In the summer of 48 my older brother told me that if I wanted to play high school football I had to ‘get ready’. In his terms, ‘getting ready’ meant running to get in condition for the rigors of football practice.

In the spring of 09 I want to begin the quest for wisdom. How do I ‘get ready’ for becoming wise?

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

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

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

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

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

Questions for consideration:
Is caring necessary for understanding? I think so.
What is ‘understanding’?
Is curiosity necessary for knowing? I think so.
Is curiosity necessary for understanding? I think so.
Is a knowledge of history required to ‘see life whole’? Absolutely!!
Is difficulty our duty? I think so.

[beroq]

To reach the path of wisdom, one need to know oneself before anything else.

[Uberzensch]

Questions for consideration:
Is caring necessary for understanding? I think so.
What is ‘understanding’?
Is curiosity necessary for knowing? I think so.
Is curiosity necessary for understanding? I think so.
Is a knowledge of history required to ‘see life whole’? Absolutely!!
Is difficulty our duty? I think so.

These questions make Wittgenstein's brain explode as he rolls over in his grave!

[RichardHresko]

St. Augustine argues that it is faith that leads us to understanding

[NikolaiI]

To reach the path of wisdom, one need to know oneself before anything else.

I agree with this. It's absolutely essential.

[The Atheist]

Is there a path to wisdom?

Sure.

CT (Critical Thinking) is the keystone for discovering these illusions. The Catch-22 here is how can one develop a critical mind when they are deluded into thinking they have a critical mind?

Easy, eh?

When our educational system has not taught our citizens how to think critically how can our citizens ever pull themselves out of this deep hole of illusion?

They can't, but I'm not sure it matters.

Every hive needs a good number of drones.

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble; it’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so”—Mark Twain

coberstakaDutchuncle

Cor, Dutch Uncle. Haven't seen one of those for a very long time.

Why only a path to wisdom?

Can anyone seriously believe there is only one way?

Well, you could go by magic roundabout, but I am 100% behind Coberst here. Reality trumps everything, every single time.

Further, there are two separate problems in knowing -- one epistemological (how do I know something?), and the other metaphysical (what exactly is there to know?).

Why does this keep coming up?

Luckily, even my six-year old can tell the difference between reality and illusion.

"Reality might not exist, therefore I will become a solipsist" loses its appeal early.

It's a lovely agnostic intellectual position, but pretty fruitless.

I find it disappointing that some people never move beyond this, because it seriously limits critical thinking. How can you think critically and assess evidence if you aren't even sure what evidence is, or even worse, what "is" is? You become a politician!

It's also why I'm The Atheist, not The Agnostic.

The path to wisdom is through experience.One was a small minded person with prejudices.But when in dire need one was given alms of love by the prejudiced.One changed after that and knew love, universal love and acknowledged that all were but hues.Here experience taught one what knowledge and readings did not teach.

Just how Jesus would have put it.

Alas, it breaks down in reality, because people don't always get wiser.

Questions for consideration:
Is caring necessary for understanding? I think so.
What is ‘understanding’?
Is curiosity necessary for knowing? I think so.
Is curiosity necessary for understanding? I think so.
Is a knowledge of history required to ‘see life whole’? Absolutely!!
Is difficulty our duty? I think so.

Are you suggesting it's our duty to take on difficulties? Or that we should take on this particular one?

I don't know whether I'd use "caring", but I think the principle's right.

Understanding is being able to empathise. Women usually do it better, but strangely, fewer of them want to use it in a wider sense. Philosophy's quite blokey.

St. Augustine argues that it is faith that leads us to understanding

David Icke argues faith in his belief in the lizard people will lead us to understanding.

You need to have a good filter.

[RichardHresko]

One way to eliminate a problem is to simply decide it does not exist. This might be valid, but then it might not be.

The problem of the nature of reality can be "solved" if one works from an assumption that materialism (or for that matter, ideas as suggested by Plato and others) is the simple answer.

"For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean, and wrong."
H.L. Mencken

[The Atheist]

The problem of the nature of reality can be "solved" if one works from an assumption that materialism (or for that matter, ideas as suggested by Plato and others) is the simple answer.

Well, on the day something non-material is found to exist, we'll reassess it all, but since we haven't yet in 10,000 years of trying and millions of galaxies investigated by sight, I see no reason not to accept materialism instead of vacillating about gnosticism.

"For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean, and wrong."
H.L. Mencken

Yes, and misplaced quotes are high on the list.

Mencken was a materialist.

[RichardHresko]

Tautologies hardly count as proofs. When one defines what exists as those things that are shown to exist materially and then concludes that only material things exist all one has accomplished is a demonstration of a lack of understanding of logic and a mind that is closed to everything except what it wants to see.

Mencken also wrote for the Baltimore Sun. Which is about as relevant to my use of his quote as his materialism was. Namely not at all.

[The Atheist]

Tautologies hardly count as proofs. When one defines what exists as those things that are shown to exist materially and then concludes that only material things exist all one has accomplished is a demonstration of a lack of understanding of logic and a mind that is closed to everything except what it wants to see.

I'd switch "observable through measurement" for "what I can see", but if that's how you class someone as closed-minded, I'll gladly wear the tag.

As I said, I prefer to take a position rather than be a solipsist agnostic.

Mencken also wrote for the Baltimore Sun. Which is about as relevant to my use of his quote as his materialism was. Namely not at all.

Which, by a staggering coincidence, is exactly how much relevance it had to my comment.