Knowledge or wisdom

[AlisaD]

These concepts may be a bit hard to define, and are often connected, but not necessarily. For example, a person I know, who teaches nuclear physics at a university, undoubtedly has a lot of knowledge, and yet repeatedly shows utter lack of any wisdom.
It got me thinking, people talk about the search for knowledge here a lot, but rarely mention wisdom.
So, hypothetically, if you had to choose, which one would you take?
Would you prefer gaining knowledge of the facts in an area that interests you, or gaining wisdom, which, truthfully, I can not define accurately. But you know what it is. If you don't - then just choose knowledge, I guess.

 

[gruesomebrat]

Wisdom too often coincides with "maturity". There is this misconception that the wise must not show themselves having any fun, or their wisdom will be taken away. I'd much rather have knowledge of a number of subjects and be able to spontaneously decide to experiment with that knowledge, by blowing up an anthill with a firecracker, for example. If I know what a firecracker does, and decide to see what damage it does to an anthill, I'm using my knowledge to further expand my knowledge. It just might not be the wisest thing to be doing.

 

[AlisaD]

Wisdom too often coincides with "maturity". There is this misconception that the wise must not show themselves having any fun, or their wisdom will be taken away. I'd much rather have knowledge of a number of subjects and be able to spontaneously decide to experiment with that knowledge, by blowing up an anthill with a firecracker, for example. If I know what a firecracker does, and decide to see what damage it does to an anthill, I'm using my knowledge to further expand my knowledge. It just might not be the wisest thing to be doing.

Thank you - great example of the difference.

I agree that wisdom does not exclude fun, but I imagine that a wise person would think that killing things is no fun at all, and would put their knowledge, if they have any, to a better use.
This does not necessarily mean that it wouldn't be fun (you can stick a firecracker into a lot of things, see what happens, enjoy the Kaboom! - expand your knowledge, and - not kill anything )
Or you could observe a person who has knowledge using that knowledge to kill things for fun and learn a whole lot about human nature.

 

[Vodhgarm]

Knowledge, I'm wise enough ..

 

[Taniwha]

Both?

 

[Adymus]

Wisdom ftw.

You can never be wise enough, and wisdom is synergistic with knowledge. The more wise one is, the better they can apply their knowledge. In fact, wisdom is like universal knowledge, meaning you will be able to respond better to any situation, regardless if you actually know anything about it or not.

Edit: Fuck, I guess that makes me the cleric of the party.

 

[AlisaD]

Both?

No can't do! Not for the purposes of the poll, at least.
Choose!
Please?

 

[Words]

"Wisdom" is the "value counterpart of 'Intellect'". It is what measures our ability of defining the "oughts" and the "what should matter's" . Hence, many see it as a mere "relative" idea. I, on the other hand, do not stand by the same position. There is "Logic" in "Wisdom" similar to how there is "Logic" in Intellect. "I would rather know what I want than know things I don't care about". But it is interesting that my nature coincides with both, but again, I am not yet sure of my nature. I chose "Wisdom" because "you have to know what your looking for before you look for it".

"Knowledge" is on the level of "Logic". There is knowledge and logic in both "Wisdom" and "Intellect".

essentially but not limited to EQ vs. IQ

 

[Taniwha]

I have knowledge, and as Einstein put it, knowledge is limited.

I choose Wisdom.

 

[Jesse]

I pick wisdom. Wisdom mean more magic while knowledge is just useless skills. I think I play to much games...

I think in my daily life I aim to improve knowledge far more than wisdom but wisdom has this awesome power associated with it. The better question would be how to achieve wisdom? Only answer I know is go and do dumb stuff.

 

[Jennywocky]

I like both, and I think Wisdom is driven by knowledge, so they're kind of hard to separate.

Wisdom coaches you in effective ways to use the knowledge you have, so I like Wisdom better. It's contextual, whereas knowledge is just content.

If you don't have wisdom, all the knowledge in the world can't stop you from being a complete flake and/or fraud.

 

[Cogwulf]

On their own, each is useless.
many wise people may have lived a thousand years ago, but they didn't achieve anything that compares to modern achievements.
On the other hand I can use the internet to find just about any fact about anything, but I wouldn't know what that fact meant.

Wisdom is the ability to see meaning in something

 

[ScorpioINTP]

I like both, and I think Wisdom is driven by knowledge, so they're kind of hard to separate.

Wisdom coaches you in effective ways to use the knowledge you have, so I like Wisdom better. It's contextual, whereas knowledge is just content.

If you don't have wisdom, all the knowledge in the world can't stop you from being a complete flake and/or fraud.

I agree. Both (even if not allowed by the poll). Knowledge is needed to have wisdom. You can never have too much of either.

For the purposes of the poll, I guess I need wisdom to figure out what to do with my life (or at least look at it in another perspective).

 

[ScorpioINTP]

On their own, each is useless.
many wise people may have lived a thousand years ago, but they didn't achieve anything that compares to modern achievements.
On the other hand I can use the internet to find just about any fact about anything, but I wouldn't know what that fact meant.

Wisdom is the ability to see meaning in something

You might need to rethink that.

Someone (I don't think it was the Egyptians) built those pyramids (on almost every continent) and we still can't explain how or replicate it today. The Mayans created the long calendar and had full understanding of the universe. Many examples of things like that in ancient history. The Romans had a global empire, aqueducts and trade. The asians and native americans discovered medicine.

Then you have the geniuses like DaVinci, Galileo etc who laid the groundwork for modern science and industry, which never could have happened without their imagination and insight.

Technology is more dazzling now, buildings taller and we ventured into space, but I wouldn't say they are necessarily better "achievements". The avg person takes this technology to play video games, watch movies and porn and text nonsense. Shut the power grid off and alot of people are going to freak out. Same for water/food supplies.

 

[Cogwulf]

Someone (I don't think it was the Egyptians) built those pyramids (on almost every continent) and we still can't explain how or replicate it today.

Pyramids are the simplest form of architecture, they are self-supporting and can be constructed with simple tools, the only difficulty is manpower.
Any primitive civilisation attempting to create large structures would discover pyramids.
We know how they did it, we know it was possible. No one has ever tried to replicate it just because of the obvious expenses of such a project.
But compare a pyramid to the empire state building, then compare the empire state building to the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Yes the pyramids are amazing, but they are simply not in the same league as the structures being built this century.

The Mayans created the long calendar and had full understanding of the universe.

The mayans had a good knowledge of the movements of the stars and planets. You say the mayans had a full understanding of the universe, that's got to be a joke right?

The Romans had a global empire, aqueducts and trade.

Europe is global?
Aquaducts are nothing spectacular
Children understand the concepts of trade.

The asians and native americans discovered medicine.

They discovered eating certain plants can have curative effects

Then you have the geniuses like DaVinci, Galileo etc who laid the groundwork for modern science and industry, which never could have happened without their imagination and insight.

Exactly, they were clever people, but didn't achieve anything concrete because they didn't know what we do.

Technology is more dazzling now, buildings taller and we ventured into space, but I wouldn't say they are necessarily better "achievements". The avg person takes this technology to play video games, watch movies and porn and text nonsense. Shut the power grid off and alot of people are going to freak out. Same for water/food supplies.

I didn't say they were better, I just said they didn't compare to each other. All I'm saying is that technological advancements require both knowledge and wisdom. And that the difference between modern technology and ancient technology is just because our knowledge is greater, our wisdom is no greater than that of our ancestors

 

[Moocow]

When I think of people that have a lot of knowledge and little wisdom, I think of politicians.

Though the two aren't totally separate. It takes wisdom to accumulate knowledge instead of denying or ignoring facts.

 

[NoID10ts]

I prefer a half assed pseudo intellectual fog of fantastical theories that are as intriguing as they are unsatisfying, remain impenetrable to reason, and are open enough to interpretation as to breed all manner of extremism.

What's the word for that? I'm surprised there's no option for it in the poll.

Since there isn't, I guess I'll go with wisdom.

 

[dark]

My input on wisdom is found at my blog here: Wisdom

You can either agree or disagree I don't care. I deduced this meaning from the wisest man to live, Socrates.

Now to the topic on hand. I choose neither. I would rather be on the journey to gain either than to have one.

 

[dark]

To add a little since I see a repetition of thought here. What you call wisdom is merely utilitarian intelligence. U.I. = something similar to experience. This does not equate to wisdom.

 

[EditorOne]

"wisdom is synergistic with knowledge. The more wise one is, the better they can apply their knowledge"

Yes, but as Jennywocky said (agreeing with her again for the second time today, yeesh), I think it first flows in the other direction, wisdom springing out of knowledge.

Interestingly, usage can equate the two. Merriam-Webster:

Definition of WISDOM

1
a : accumulated philosophic or scientific learning : knowledge
b : ability to discern inner qualities and relationships : insight
c : good sense : judgment
d : generally accepted belief <challenges what has become accepted wisdom among many historians — Robert Darnton>


Look what they included, with d: Isn't that contrary to the other flavors of the word? "Generally accepted belief" and "received wisdom" are synonyms, to me, for "unexamined ideas" and "sure ways to make a mistake."

I think most of us would probably accept "insight" as the way we're using the word "wisdom" in this, with a good sprinkling of "ability to make good choices/decisions" on top of it.

So I don't think it really is an either/or deal, AlisaD, even if you want us to choose.

 

[ScorpioINTP]

Pyramids are the simplest form of architecture, they are self-supporting and can be constructed with simple tools, the only difficulty is manpower.
Any primitive civilisation attempting to create large structures would discover pyramids.
We know how they did it, we know it was possible. No one has ever tried to replicate it just because of the obvious expenses of such a project.
But compare a pyramid to the empire state building, then compare the empire state building to the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Yes the pyramids are amazing, but they are simply not in the same league as the structures being built this century.


The mayans had a good knowledge of the movements of the stars and planets. You say the mayans had a full understanding of the universe, that's got to be a joke right?

Europe is global?
Aquaducts are nothing spectacular
Children understand the concepts of trade.

They discovered eating certain plants can have curative effects

Exactly, they were clever people, but didn't achieve anything concrete because they didn't know what we do.

I didn't say they were better, I just said they didn't compare to each other. All I'm saying is that technological advancements require both knowledge and wisdom. And that the difference between modern technology and ancient technology is just because our knowledge is greater, our wisdom is no greater than that of our ancestors

Wow, I'm not even going to waste my energy on replying to this. You obviously have no frame of reference and can only see ancient technology and creation from your own modern concept. You have to look at it from the context of the times. And to say the great pyramid is simply a pile of stones is completely ignorant. You obviously haven't looked at them deeper to see the precision beyond modern capabilities and inexplicable intricacies (not to mention symbolism and meaning) and NO we don't know how they built them. The theories are still debated today and most of them don't hold water. There is no sure answer and its highly doubtful it could be replicated today (technologically) according to the experts and I agree. There is no concrete evidence the Egyptians were the true builders, nor of their true purpose. No pharoh/mummy has ever been found in a pyramid. It's not amazing because its a Pyramid. ITs amazing because of the sheer scale and precision and mystery...and yes those are global.

Modern achievements and technology continue to build on the past. The Burj might be tall and impressive yes, but it's far from practical or efficient and 50% vacant and 50% of that is elevator shafts. Built on pure ego.

Its all off topic anyway. Davinci /Galileo and others didn't achieve anything concrete? lol

 

[Unsure]

I chose wisdom. I would like to have the wisdom to know how to apply my knowledge effectively, in all areas of m life.

 

[Cogwulf]

Wow, I'm not even going to waste my energy on replying to this. You obviously have no frame of reference and can only see ancient technology and creation from your own modern concept. You have to look at it from the context of the times. And to say the great pyramid is simply a pile of stones is completely ignorant. You obviously haven't looked at them deeper to see the precision beyond modern capabilities and inexplicable intricacies (not to mention symbolism and meaning) and NO we don't know how they built them. The theories are still debated today and most of them don't hold water. There is no sure answer and its highly doubtful it could be replicated today (technologically) according to the experts and I agree. There is no concrete evidence the Egyptians were the true builders, nor of their true purpose. No pharoh/mummy has ever been found in a pyramid. It's not amazing because its a Pyramid. ITs amazing because of the sheer scale and precision and mystery...and yes those are global.

Modern achievements and technology continue to build on the past. The Burj might be tall and impressive yes, but it's far from practical or efficient and 50% vacant and 50% of that is elevator shafts. Built on pure ego.

Its all off topic anyway. Davinci /Galileo and others didn't achieve anything concrete? lol

I have read good theories of how the pyramids were built, it is the attempts at countering these theories that don't hold water.
If the Egyptians didn't build them, then who.
The only reason we don't have the technology to build the pyramid today is because we have no need to do so. It is easy to devise simple methods to produce many identical blocks of stone, and likewise for placing them accurately.
There are many quirks in the measurements of the pyramid that can't be coincidence. But mathematics was well understood back then, is it hard to believe that they just decided to design it that way.
People have always overcome such difficulties, the question is can those difficulties be overcame with their current technology. There is nothing the egyptians needed that they couldn't have feasibly possessed.

(not to mention symbolism and meaning)

symbolism and meaning are in the eye of the beholder


Wisdom shines through the ages as a constant. The wise men who designed the pyramid and the engineers who designed the dubai tower would get on well.
Knowledge however grows through time. Every time a generation dies, the next generation continues from where the last left off.

I often wish I lived long ago so I could be the one building these wonders, as now everything is taken for granted and anything new is too quickly used and forgotten.
I also sometimes wish to see the world from far into the future so I can see what remains of the present, and what people say about them.


I take it as an insult that you claim I only see ancient technology in a modern context and I will respond in kind -despite how much I hate to sink to straw man arguments.
You are a person who clings to your misconceptions, as you do not want to challenge your own understanding.

 

[ScorpioINTP]

I take it as an insult that you claim I only see ancient technology in a modern context and I will respond in kind -despite how much I hate to sink to straw man arguments.
You are a person who clings to your misconceptions, as you do not want to challenge your own understanding.

No insult intended. I do not make a habit of name calling or personal attacks on the internet. Sorry if it came across this way, I just disagree with what you said and it seemed as though you dismiss things like Roman aqueducts by comparing them to modern technology without considering time time they were built and without modern machinery. You were the initial poster who made the comment about modern vs. 1000 yr old achievements.

I knew I shouldn't have bothered replying. This is far too deep and complex to hijack a thread over.

I have no preconceptions or misconceptions. My mind is always open to exploring questions and possibilities. I find that insulting that you make that judgement. I took what I read and heard about things at face value when I was younger, but as I get older and wiser, I realize not everything you read in a book/taught in school is correct and needs to be reassessed. And IMO the BS they claim about how the pyramids were built just doesn't work in reality. NO metal tools, no computers, blueprints etc. You don't just build something that perfect without a precise plan (internally and externally, and globally). Anyhow, no offense, but I think it is you who is holding on the misconceptions. I never, in fact, made any claims specifically.
You go on believing what you believe. I don't care. I humbly return the thread to its intended question and sorry for bringing it up.

 

[5k17]

Knowledge is extrinsic; wisdom is intrinsic. Wisdom cannot be attained, everyone just has their certain amount of wisdom, and that's it. Also, it can be very helpful for augmenting one's knowledge.
Compared to wisdom, knowledge is useless. It can sometimes be helpful, or give a feeling of satisfaction, but what counts is not having knowledge, but the wonderful moments of insight wherein it is gained.

 

[Agent Intellect]

I would choose understanding.

Since that wasn't an option, I thought wisdom was close enough, so that's what I voted. I'm annoyed when I know something but can't do anything with it (hence why I like debate).

 

[GYX_Kid]

When I think of people that have a lot of knowledge and little wisdom, I think of politicians.

^

 

[Firehazard159]

Well, considering the preface to wisdom is knowledge, wisdom is inevitably going to preferable.

Without knowledge, you can't have wisdom.

Though maybe I'm being unfair in the spirit of the threads question, but I was arguing this point with my friend the other day, and that was something along the lines of:

I would want knowledge first before wisdom, because you need to know before you can be wise. I would want to achieve wisdom next in line, and after wisdom and knowledge would I want power.

I wouldn't take a single one without any of the others though, because that would simply lead to immense frustration. Wisdom is pointless without knowledge, and knowledge is pointless without power. Power is... well, dangerous, without wisdom or knowledge. And I wouldn't want anyone lacking wisdom or knowledge to have power, including myself.

But then, that's all probably a somewhat extreme example mostly relevant to the conversation I was having.

 

[Cogwulf]

No insult intended. I do not make a habit of name calling or personal attacks on the internet. Sorry if it came across this way, I just disagree with what you said and it seemed as though you dismiss things like Roman aqueducts by comparing them to modern technology without considering time time they were built and without modern machinery. You were the initial poster who made the comment about modern vs. 1000 yr old achievements.

I knew I shouldn't have bothered replying. This is far too deep and complex to hijack a thread over.

I have no preconceptions or misconceptions. My mind is always open to exploring questions and possibilities. I find that insulting that you make that judgement. I took what I read and heard about things at face value when I was younger, but as I get older and wiser, I realize not everything you read in a book/taught in school is correct and needs to be reassessed. And IMO the BS they claim about how the pyramids were built just doesn't work in reality. NO metal tools, no computers, blueprints etc. You don't just build something that perfect without a precise plan (internally and externally, and globally). Anyhow, no offense, but I think it is you who is holding on the misconceptions. I never, in fact, made any claims specifically.
You go on believing what you believe. I don't care. I humbly return the thread to its intended question and sorry for bringing it up.

okay, last post from me too.

All I was ever trying to say to begin with was that the difference between now and then is knowledge not wisdom. You said it yourself, da vinci and galileo set the foundation for modern science. People now aren't wiser than them, they just know things they didn't.
Next I was trying to explain past achievements in comparison to the technology available at the time, not to modern technology.
Pyramids, aquaducts, the dubai tower etc. are simply examples of the current technology of the time being pushed to its limits.
The egyptians already knew how to build pyramids when they built the great pyramid. The Romans had a brilliant understanding of archways before they built the aquaducts. And the dubai tower just pushes steel and concrete to it's limits, it hasn't used anything new. The pyramid and the aquaducts are the biggest examples of their respective technologies. But now steel and concrete is at it's limits too, as stone archways cannot be built any bigger, skyscrapers can not be built any bigger. There are a few plans for Km tall towers, but any bigger and they will not be able to support their own weight and have any useful space at the same time. We've reached the limits of our knowledge as have others before us.


Your misconceptions I was referring to were things like saying the Roman empire was global, or that the mayans had a full understanding of the universe. If you think these things then it makes your knowledge of the subjects appear to be limited