How Old are You? - Revisiting an Old PFs Thread

[Saint]

I am 31 ------- feel very old !

 

[Integral]

Maximus,
You speak of wisdom as if where a measurable quanity. I am sorry, that is a pretty silly notion. Dismiss any ideas that wisdom, unless you are happy with Mentat's dictionary definition, is something that you seek out. You seek knowledge, you gain wisdom. Or as I said before you EARN wisdom. That is what separates knowledge from wisdom.

You cannot compare wisdom as you do years of school or books read. You cannot rate degrees of wisdom, nor can you even claim wisdom for yourself. In my mind wisdom is something that can only be recognized in you by your associates in life. As soon as you proclaim yourself to be wise you reveal yourself to be a fool.

 

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by maximus
for the record, can you specify the difference between wise and Wise?

Well, what I think is that you wish to lead me into proving a point, and if this is what you are doing then it would not be Wise for me to continue in this thread.

Now do you understand the difference?

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by Integral
Maximus,
You speak of wisdom as if where a measurable quanity. I am sorry, that is a pretty silly notion. Dismiss any ideas that wisdom, unless you are happy with Mentat's dictionary definition, is something that you seek out. You seek knowledge, you gain wisdom. Or as I said before you EARN wisdom. That is what separates knowledge from wisdom.

You cannot compare wisdom as you do years of school or books read. You cannot rate degrees of wisdom, nor can you even claim wisdom for yourself. In my mind wisdom is something that can only be recognized in you by your associates in life. As soon as you proclaim yourself to be wise you reveal yourself to be a fool.

wisdom must, to some degree, be measurable. otherwise, how is it that someone can specify one person as being wise and another as not being wise? what is the distinction?

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Well, what I think is that you wish to lead me into proving a point, and if this is what you are doing then it would not be Wise for me to continue in this thread.

i am not attemting to drive any point out of your statements, i only wonder what the difference between the two is, because i think it may be crusial to building an understanding in this the disscusion.

Now do you understand the difference?

no, I'm sorry. any subtle point you were trying to make has eluded me.

 

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Mentat
First off, this is not my main line of argument. LW Sleeth has yet to directly (and open-mindedly) counter that line of argument.

LWS has yet to respond to "what" line of argument? If this is not your line of argument then what line is it that he hasn't responded to?

Secondly, "it's obvious that my computer is not wise"? Surely you realize the closed-minded nature of this statement. Besides, did you happen to read the definitions of Wisdom? [/B]

Well pardon me. I wasn't approaching this discussion in this way. If you want to have a discussion along these lines then this topic needs to be moved to the philosophy forum. I interpreted this conversation (in the General forum) to be about the common understanding and usefullness of wisdom. In this common usage, the word wisdom would be meaningless if we were going to leave my PC open as a candidate. In this context, I don't think anyone would agree that my pc is wise. But if you want to claim that this is closed minded then you are either being hard headed or this topic belongs in the philosophy forum.

 

[maximus]

i recomended (jokingly) that this should be moved to the philosophy forum a long time ago.

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by Fliption
But if you want to claim that this is closed minded then you are either being hard headed or this topic belongs in the philosophy forum.

but wait! are you saying that one should be closed-minded in general discussion?

 

[Fliption]

Originally posted by maximus
but wait! are you saying that one should be closed-minded in general discussion?

No. I'm saying the objective and therefore the standard for deciding such things is different in the general forum.

 

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by maximus
...no, I'm sorry. any subtle point you were trying to make has eluded me.

How do I make you understand, grasshopper?

I think I'm going to be unable to make progress beyond what I've already said. In the end, what I deem as wise and what you deem as wise may be two different things entirely.

You have acknowledged that time, and hence age, are good general guidelines to go with, and this was all that I really wanted to say. To keep a clipboard and run through a checklist, adding up an experience here and another over there, then summing up the results at the bottom and proclaiming oneself likely to be wise is just not what I'm interested in doing.

I do not claim to be wise, nor do I claim to be an intellectual. I am not interested in wearing a label, and if I were I would much sooner call myself an idiot than a wise man. I believe that my years have taught me to recognize wisdom in others, regardless of the persons age. I also know that most young people are anything but wise. They are inexperienced, reckless, and often driven more by their hormones than their minds. I was just like that once, this is all a part of being human. I will take sage advice where I find it, though I have to acknowledge that I've found it most often in older people.

 

[Integral]

wisdom must, to some degree, be measurable. otherwise, how is it that someone can specify one person as being wise and another as not being wise? what is the distinction?

Why must it be measureable?

Wisdom is recognized in others, not yourself. This is regardless of age.

 

[TENYEARS]

Wisdom when witnessed in others is a reflection of yourself or how would you know the difference. Problem with these types of posts is instead of understanding the intrinsic nature of the post, people scoff it up and attribute it as wisdom. This type of understanding is false and does not stand up to the fire.

I had a post in old PF in the slowing of time with audacity dan. I would not post exactly what it was, but AD was close. Next thing I know I witnessed the same logic which was not posted priorly on the forum being used in other places. I know it was not original or completely understood by nature of other posts.

If tomarrow science said that God exists, or the moon was made of swiss cheese or bigfoot was a reality or that slick really did'nt breath in would this be considered wisdom if you read it and stored it in memory? No the only thing you know is that it was said. Belief. This is what keeps me from moving. This circle.

Yet last summer I had a vision which I know is going to come to pass and I do not understand how or why or what degree only that it will. I do not know if it will be as a result of talking on this forum or with poeple or a combination of things.

The purpose is to show that there is a reality which exists that is in accordance with physics and the natural world. This will happen, I just do not know how. Knowing in an unknowing.

I was going to ask the question is there anyone interested in proving such a thing and suddenly found myself in a fishtank. As if it would be that easy or reveal it's path to me in that manner. That is the difference between wisdom and not. Life for the most part is not in boxes, it is what it is and what that is is for us to discover as human beings.

 

[Les Sleeth]

Originally posted by maximus
for the record, could you state the difference between wise and Wise . . .how is it that someone can specify one person as being wise and another as not being wise? what is the distinction?

So Maximus, can I assume you didn't like or agree with my efforts to define wisdom, and draw a distinction between the two types? To make sure you are still unsatisified with those explanations, let me reiterate.

First, in general I have been defining wisdom as (and I believe this is what others have been saying too) experienced-based learning.

This is to be distinquished from intellectual learning which takes place through study and thought alone. So, for example, you might study law in books and have a brilliant understanding of it, but never become wise in law until you start practicing law. How wise someone gets depends on how open and dedicated one is to learning while doing.

I went on to try to give you a sense of some of the ways the knowledge you now have in your head from reading and thinking is a different type of knowledge than that learned from actually doing. I explained that the intellect only creates a model, a mental construct that approximates the aspect of reality it’s trying to represent, whereas the experience of doing is a multi-dimensional experience, which I characterized with the terms richness, certainty, and wholeness. I suggested that the rich understanding, certainty and holistic view amounts to a kind of power that builds in one the more one experiences – you know, you just don’t “think” so.

Second, the I suggested for the wise-Wise distinction separating wisdom into two types: mundane and profound. By “mundane” wisdom I mean that understanding of how things function one acquires from working with them for many years. Regarding profound wisdom (or Wise, as Boulderhead put it), I said that was hard to explain since there isn't a lot of agreement about what’s profound. But that if there is something which is profound, the same rules apply as with the mundane: one needs experience of the profound to acquire true wisdom.


Whether you believe there is anything beyond the mundane or not (and therefore making "Wise" possible), at least we should be at the point in this discussion where we are clear why an older person won't accept a young person can be wise, especially one still living at home. It's because we are defining wisdom as experienced-based learning, and since youth haven't had time for much life experience, they also cannot have much wisdom.

It is no slight to you, and says nothing about how much wiser than all of us you will become when you do gain life experience. That is what I meant when I said to Mentat that there is difference between potential and realized potential. I mean, if you redefine wisdom to include the inexperienced, then wisdom ends up meaning nothing.

So, if you have to live to get it, then why fight it? Get on with living!

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Lets try this, one of the greatest gifts that I have gotten, in my life, (aside from my life which is the first and greatest one) was the knowledge of the "Truth about myself".

It took until I was in my thirties till that happened, and I had had to face some simple realities, like my ability to be "intellectually obstinent", and other negative qualities (positive ones too) that I needed to recognize as a part of me before I could realize that simple truth.

It is a gift!, as it enables me to, in many cases, see "The truth in others", as I can distinguish the difference between 'them' and me, more easily.

But to find that, (receive it actually) you must employ the right tools of self investigation, and, you must be willing to face up to the cold hard truth about yourself in as un-varnished a fashion as it will be presented to you.

Look for the truth, and it will find you, but will you be prepared to accept it? recognize it?

A friend told me an expression, when I was 25, when I was ~35 that expression returned into my head one day, after having just gone through a tasking life trial, and WOW, it made sense to me then as it had never made sense to me at 25, even though, at 25, I had known all the words, understood what they meant, understood what the expression endevoured to tell me, but I just didn't have the life experaince to recognize it till ten years later.

What a revelation that was!

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Integral
Does a human being exist which does not fulfill some facet of these definitions?

That's the point. There is no evidence that proves to me (so far) that wisdom doesn't exist in all human beings, regardless of their age.

Wisdom is one of those concepts which cannot be captured by a simple dictionary definition. Had I known, Mentat, that you needed a dictionary definition this conversation would not have taken place.

You were the one who asked for a definition of wisdom. I assumed that a dictionary would carry more weight than my own opinion.

I assumed that you had a deeper knowledge, as you have claimed. Clearly this is not the case. You will find, that as you age, you will adopt your own working definition of such words, which give such concepts a deeper personal meaning then can be found in a dictionary. I guess you are not there yet.

I have my own definition of wisdom, it just happens to agree with this dictionary's definition. So I presented the one with more recognizable credentials (remember, it is my ability to understand what wisdom really is that is brought into question by LW Sleeth and you).

Wisdom is one of those things that is different for different stages of life, what is wise for a 5 year old may not be so for a 50 yr old. Youth is for learning, until you have raised children of your own you can not appreciate the rate at which infants are capable of learning, while adults can still learn and should never stop learning, children are blank slates waiting to soak up information. For you to assume that you have wisdom equal to that of an adult is not really displaying the wisdom a 15yr old needs, in fact just the opposite, such a judgment is foolish.

Why? It is your assumption that dictates that wisdom must come in stages for every human being. You haven't proved anything, and to post your assumptions as though they were the obvious truth, without providing proof, is truly foolish (no offense).

Wisdom, at your stage of life it to grasp at every source of knowledge available. For you, this means listening to both good and bad information. Indeed, you need to be learning to filter information but be careful in filtering out the wheat with the chafe. How without some experience can you know the difference? Do you expect to get this from a textbook? Or perhaps you should take the word of someone? Do you see the dilemma?

You are saying that I shouldn't except someone's word on what is wise and what is not. You are also trying to explain wisdom to me. You have thus disqualified yourself (along with everyone else).

If you automatically choose not to listen to adults simply because you have convinced yourself of your personal wisdom you are making a big mistake. Far from being wise, this is the action of a fool.

But I do listen to adults, I just don't take them as some sort of "final authority", and I don't take their words as though they had more wisdom than that of a child, unless I see some reason to. King Solomon was very young when he became king, yet he is still considered one of the wisest men who every lived.

It is not clear to me what it is you wish me to prove?

That your view of wisdom is the correct one.

Why is it that I am expected to prove what I say while you are not?

Because I am not posting an opinion, you are. I am posting my lack of opinion and wish to be enlightened.

What proof of your beliefs have you provided? Once again you make statements that are not indicative of wisdom.

If the fact that I have not substantiated my stance is proof of lack of wisdom, then you must also be unwise. If, however, you start to realize that I am not stuck on an opinion, and merely wish to understand what wisdom really is (not just someone's opinion, no matter how old they are), then you will understand what I mean when I ask for "proof".

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Learning requires time.

But not everyone requires the same amount of time. I could not have learned anything, if I hadn't lived for some period of time. However, I know more, on cerain subjects, than many people who have had much more time to learn about them.

Well, I think I can find the most agreement in this last statement made, but I want to add a few more of my own comments to this thread too;
I do not believe that anyone is born wise. If someone here believes that newborns and infants are wise, I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

Unless, of course, we can agree that wisdom has to do with one's open-mindedness, in which case an infant is - in fact - wise.

The rule stands.

Most young people don’t know a hot rock from a hole in the ground. It’s nothing personal whatsoever; they just haven’t lived long enough yet.

But what if someone teaches them the difference? Then they needn't live a long time to gain the knowledge, they had it when they were young.

In another decade or two, you will likely look back and see yourself in a completely different light then how you imagine yourself now. You may recognize mistakes made in your youth that were out of your control due to your immaturity. Age can bring with it a vantage point, like climbing to the top of a hill, from which you can look downward and backward and see things that you might have missed along the way. But, it takes time to climb.

Yet some are much better climbers than others.

I think Mentat may feel looked down upon and relegated to an automatic ‘inferior’ status by older people, and it is true that young people are often dismissed in such a way.

I think Mentat will let you analyze him in the third-person this one time .

However, it is by actually taking the time to speak with and getting to know individuals that we are able to determine whether they have anything of consequence to say or not. I might have suspicions that I wouldn’t find a young person worthy of giving sage advice, but if what came out of their mouth seemed worthwhile I would listen and consider it…I would also begin to lower my ‘bubble-gummer’ shield a bit the next time we spoke.

Then you are wiser than many older people I have met.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
He could be wiser in some areas and less wise in others. He may, for instance, have never been exposed to all that the 30 year old had been exposed to. In any event, it still took fifteen years to get were this individual was, so I would figure that a 15 year old would tend to be more wise than a 10 year old, wouldn't you?

Yes, but that's dodging the issue. It is the apparent opinion of many members here, that wisdom must come with much more age than 15 years, and thus the reasoning that a 15-year-old can be as wise as a 30-year-old is in direct conflict with the opinion of many members here.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Integral
Maximus,
You speak of wisdom as if where a measurable quanity. I am sorry, that is a pretty silly notion.

You were going to leave it at that, weren't you? How can you possibly be satisfied with just stating your opinion like that? How can you expect the one seeing you opinion to just accept it, without proof?

Knowledge can be measured, Understanding can be measured, so why can't Wisdom (according to your reasoining)?

Dismiss any ideas that wisdom, unless you are happy with Mentat's dictionary definition, is something that you seek out. You seek knowledge, you gain wisdom. Or as I said before you EARN wisdom. That is what separates knowledge from wisdom.

And what grants you this wisdom, once you have "earned" it?

You cannot compare wisdom as you do years of school or books read. You cannot rate degrees of wisdom, nor can you even claim wisdom for yourself. In my mind wisdom is something that can only be recognized in you by your associates in life. As soon as you proclaim yourself to be wise you reveal yourself to be a fool.

Then why should one accept that your reasoning is wise, as that would proclaim you a fool (by your own reasoning). No offense is intended, I'm just trying to understand, and having someone state that it is impossible for it to be explained to me is unacceptable.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Fliption
LWS has yet to respond to "what" line of argument? If this is not your line of argument then what line is it that he hasn't responded to?

I am passing LW's concept of wisdom "through the fire", so to speak, as I've already mentioned. He hasn't been able to escape my reasoning, but has been restating his opinion, in different ways, assuming (as did Alexander in other threads) that my disagreement was an evidence of some misunderstanding.

Well pardon me.

I didn't mean to rebuke you, just making an observation. Forgive me, please, if I have offended.

I interpreted this conversation (in the General forum) to be about the common understanding and usefullness of wisdom. In this common usage, the word wisdom would be meaningless if we were going to leave my PC open as a candidate. In this context, I don't think anyone would agree that my pc is wise.

Alright, then one must break free of the "common" understanding, in order to be wise, mustn't they?

But if you want to claim that this is closed minded then you are either being hard headed or this topic belongs in the philosophy forum.

I see. Alright then, maybe I'll start a thread in the Philosophy Forum.

 

[BoulderHead]

quote:

Originally posted by BoulderHead
He could be wiser in some areas and less wise in others. He may, for instance, have never been exposed to all that the 30 year old had been exposed to. In any event, it still took fifteen years to get were this individual was, so I would figure that a 15 year old would tend to be more wise than a 10 year old, wouldn't you?


Originally posted by Mentat;
Yes, but that's dodging the issue. It is the apparent opinion of many members here, that wisdom must come with much more age than 15 years, and thus the reasoning that a 15-year-old can be as wise as a 30-year-old is in direct conflict with the opinion of many members here.

I wasn’t trying to dodge the issue at all. My point has been all along that there are some things that youth, even youth with a keen intellect, will not be able to compensate for. Even in youth it has still taken time to learn and to grow, and hence the connection to wisdom and the passage of time. How many teenagers seek out 5-year olds for council because they believe that age isn’t relevant in this matter? What I thought I was seeing happening was knowledge and wisdom being intermixed, and a ‘checklist’ road to wisdom being applied. I think that is not the way to approach the issue, and it makes me think of an argument about being ‘grown’;

Are you grown?
Yes, even infants are grown. They grew a little yesterday and so they know about growing, having already grown. Some infants have even grown more rapidly than others, etc, etc.

No matter how fast you learn (or grow), the process still takes time. The more time, the better, regardless of the rate of development.

I cannot speak for the other members, only for myself. It should be clear by this time that we can all have our own take on this wisdom issue. You spoke of infants and open mindedness relating to possibly being a part of wisdom, but after reading the dictionary definition you provided as representing your understanding I see little or no room for consideration of open mindedness in infancy playing a part of this and therefore I would say that bringing it up is more of a dodge on your part.

I remember that young guru now; He was/is the guru Maharaji

He was probably just a wise-ass kid that knew how to sucker the adults

 

[maximus]

Wisdom is one of those things that is different for different stages of life, what is wise for a 5 year old may not be so for a 50 yr old. Youth is for learning, until you have raised children of your own you can not appreciate the rate at which infants are capable of learning, while adults can still learn and should never stop learning, children are blank slates waiting to soak up information. For you to assume that you have wisdom equal to that of an adult is not really displaying the wisdom a 15yr old needs, in fact just the opposite, such a judgment is foolish.

but don't you see? until you abandon this assumtion, anything we say (whether in actuality it is wise or not) you will never believe to be wisdom. if you walk into this conversaion knowing that we have no wisdom, nothing we say will sway you otherwise because to you it's only the ramblings of a person "afraid of being looked down upon". i am not in this argument one sided, i see both the argument's points, and i think there is a possibility of a settlement here, providing you are willing to take what we say without prejudice.
let me ask you this, if all of what me or mentat or any of the younger people have said came out of the mouth of an older person, would you then claim it to be wisdom, even if it were the same agruement?

 

[Les Sleeth]

Originally posted by maximus
if you walk into this conversaion knowing that we have no wisdom, nothing we say will sway you otherwise . . . let me ask you this, if all of what me or mentat or any of the younger people have said came out of the mouth of an older person, would you then claim it to be wisdom, even if it were the same agruement?

I am still waiting for you to respond to the point I have laid out twice already:

1. The experience one gains from "doing" provides a unique learning opportunity that is utterly distinct from only studying, thinking and intuitive understanding.

2. Wisdom is the specific term applied to knowledge acquired while "doing."

3. Life has many lessons that need to be learned, and it takes time to get that experience.

4. If you are young, you simply haven't had enough time to acquire many life experiences.

5. However, let's acknowledge that if you are alive, and have "done" things, then you can have some wisdom. But, of all humans alive, those who are older have had far more opportunities for "doing' than younger humans.

6. Further, surviving as an adult is a level of "doing" that creates a major line of demarcation from kids. In survival activities, idealism gets smashed, theories get trashed, and inflated self images get brought down to Earth.

So, kids who claim to be wise . . . it's minds without a clue about how much they have to learn to make it as an adult. Philosohical talk is not wisdom, anybody can talk wise, especially as a phantom handle at forum. Wise in
action, that is the test one must pass.

 

[TENYEARS]

Wisdom is beyond proof. If you need proof to have wisdom or to acknowlege it you don't.

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by LW Sleeth
I am still waiting for you to respond to the point I have laid out twice already:
1. The experience one gains from "doing" provides a unique learning opportunity that is utterly distinct from only studying, thinking and intuitive understanding.

agreed. but that does not mean that you also can get an understanding from studying/thinking, ect.

2. Wisdom is the specific term applied to knowledge acquired while "doing."

not agreed. it is not so narrow a definition. wisdom, to me, can be acquired out of experience. let me ask a question: many people have agreed on this thread that the ability to look in upon yourself and know your true nature is a form of profound wisdom. i believe i have this ability, and can give you proof if you ask. so, the question is: how is this sort of wisdom (profound) gained by experience. i do not believe outer experience has anything to do with it, most of profound wisdom is inner experince, which occurs at both early and later ages. i have had a lot of inner experience, and (admitedly) not as much outer experience.

3. Life has many lessons that need to be learned, and it takes time to get that experience.

this i agree with (as you'll see in an early post of mine). but these time scales are different for every person.

4. If you are young, you simply haven't had enough time to acquire many life experiences.

not necesarily true. an older person will generally have had more outer experiences (which "earns" him some wisdom-profound or otherwise), but may not have had as many inner experiences.

5. However, let's acknowledge that if you are alive, and have "done" things, then you can have some wisdom. But, of all humans alive, those who are older have had far more opportunities for "doing' than younger humans.

more opportunities! that is exactly what mentat said in one of his first posts in here! an opportunity is not always taken. very ofter it is ignored (by older and younger alike). and therefore if a younger person is to take advantages of theirs's and other's oportunities, they can acquire wisdom that another older person may not have.

6. Further, surviving as an adult is a level of "doing" that creates a major line of demarcation from kids. In survival activities, idealism gets smashed, theories get trashed, and inflated self images get brought down to Earth.

very much agreed. but why is it that you think i or mentat can't understand this concept. maybe we realize this, and have felt it's conciquences as well as you have.

So, kids who claim to be wise . . . it's minds without a clue about how much they have to learn to make it as an adult. Philosohical talk is not wisdom, anybody can talk wise, especially as a phantom handle at forum. Wise in
action, that is the test one must pass.

again, why is it that you have so openly assumed that we have no wisdom in action?

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by Integral
Why must it be measureable?

Wisdom is recognized in others, not yourself.

this is contradictive. if wisdom is recognizable in others it must be (to some degree) measurable. how else can one say > you have wisdom > you do not > you have some > you have more>
these are measurments!

This is regardless of age.

then your agreeing with mentat and i?

 

[Integral]

Must I state the totally obvious, or are you simply being argumentive.

Were wisdom measurable we would not need to have this conversation.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Are you grown?
Yes, even infants are grown. They grew a little yesterday and so they know about growing, having already grown. Some infants have even grown more rapidly than others, etc, etc.

No matter how fast you learn (or grow), the process still takes time. The more time, the better, regardless of the rate of development.

That is illogical. If my rate of learning is greater than that of another person, then I will acquire knowledge without having to pass nearly as much time as the other person.

I cannot speak for the other members, only for myself. It should be clear by this time that we can all have our own take on this wisdom issue. You spoke of infants and open mindedness relating to possibly being a part of wisdom, but after reading the dictionary definition you provided as representing your understanding I see little or no room for consideration of open mindedness in infancy playing a part of this and therefore I would say that bringing it up is more of a dodge on your part.

Not at all, as my mentioning infants, and their open-mindedness, was not a way of showing that children can be wise, but rather a way of showing how many older people have closed their minds. If they would return to their previous open-mindedness, it stands to reason that the infant has greater potential for wisdom than the more elderly one.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by LW Sleeth
I am still waiting for you to respond to the point I have laid out twice already:

1. The experience one gains from "doing" provides a unique learning opportunity that is utterly distinct from only studying, thinking and intuitive understanding.

Why is it unique?

2. Wisdom is the specific term applied to knowledge acquired while "doing."

The dictionary and I disagree with you here. You se, one can make application in one's mind, and thus still be being wise (using "applied knowledge").

3. Life has many lessons that need to be learned, and it takes time to get that experience.

Yes, but the amount of time that it takes maximus (for example) may not be nearly as long as the amount of time it took you, or nearly the amount of time you think it should take. Honestly, at what age does one become a candidate for wisdom?

4. If you are young, you simply haven't had enough time to acquire many life experiences.

But the idea that wisdom = life experiences (or = the result of applying life experiences) is your postulate that you have yet to prove/substantiate.

5. However, let's acknowledge that if you are alive, and have "done" things, then you can have some wisdom. But, of all humans alive, those who are older have had far more opportunities for "doing' than younger humans.

But "doing" and "wisdom" may or may not be as intrinsically related as you think.

6. Further, surviving as an adult is a level of "doing" that creates a major line of demarcation from kids. In survival activities, idealism gets smashed, theories get trashed, and inflated self images get brought down to Earth.

Not necessarily, but usually I guess. So what? That just means that the theories need to be refined to actually prepare us.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Integral
Must I state the totally obvious, or are you simply being argumentive.

No, simply being argumentative would be to tell you that you should have used a question mark at the end of that question .

Reasoning is to tell you that what is "obvious" to you may be dead wrong, and thus not "obvious" to us (if we happen to be on the right track, and I'm not saying we are, I'm just saying we might be - and saying "it's obvious that you're not" isn't going to teach us anything).

Were wisdom measurable we would not need to have this conversation.

What?! Were wisdom measurable we could prove it through continuing this discussion. Were wisdom immeasurable, we could prove it through continuing this discussion. Either way, debates are for reaching the optimal conclusion, and we don't reach them by saying "I'm obviously right, and you'll realize that when you get older".

 

[Les Sleeth]

Originally posted by Mentat
Why is it unique?

This statement proves we have no basis for continuing to discuss this. Mentat , go for it. If I am still alive when you discover the difference between learning from doing and learning from your mind, I'd like to hear about it. Good luck.