The Sapience of Homo-Sapiens:

What is Wisdom?

What is Wisdom? It is a rather important consideration when talking about philosophy; considering that the Latin roots from which the word philosophy springs from, means literally: a friendly love of wisdom, or a friend of wisdom; from the Latin words Philia and Sophia meaning love (of a friendly nature) and wisdom respectively. So what does Wisdom mean then? The most rudimentary definition as taken from that great purveyor of information, Google, it means: “The quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.” (Google, (n.d.)) However, there are many who have their own takes on this word, for example the oft quoted words of Charles H. Spurgeon: “Wisdom is the right use of knowledge” (Charles Spurgeon. (n.d.)) lend to us an alternative definition from which to work from. However, as you can see, the dictionary definition provided and the anecdotal definition provided are not necessarily in alignment with one another. So how is a person to truly know what Wisdom is; as, the definition of Wisdom changes depending upon many factors; the society and timeframe of extraction, being foremost amongst them.

One of the methods is to cite the source. And that begs the question “Who then, is the source? Who is the authority on what philosophy, and thus wisdom are?” To answer those questions many credit Socrates (as depicted through the dialogues written by his informal student Plato) to be one of the founders of Western Philosophy. So, what then, does Socrates have to say about the topic? We find through the reading of our course material that Socrates (Plato?) believes Wisdom to be the absolute pursuit of the essence of things (Knowledge), of which can truly only be obtained, through the separation of the spirit (soul) from bodily distractions; i.e. death. This is most apparent in Plato’s Phaedo, in which Socrates tries to prove the immortality of the soul.

One of the arguments Socrates posits for why philosophers should not fear death, revolve around the nature of Wisdom, and how it is unattainable in mortal form: “It’s likely, to judge from our argument, that the wisdom which we desire and upon which we profess to have set our hearts will be attainable only when we are dead, and not in our lifetime.” (Plato, 2003 p. 127-128) What we can take from that quote, and the pages that precede it, is that Socrates understands wisdom to be the pursuit of knowledge, as it relates to the purest forms of such. That is to mean, trying to understand the nature reality through the limited medium of the body, trying to get as close to the Truth of things as possible, is the nature of Philosophy; and that, only upon release of the soul from the limitations of the body, can true Wisdom be attained. (Plato, 2003, p. 124-128)

So, working from the original presumption that to define a word, we must cite its source; the nature of Wisdom is then: the pursuit of the purest forms of Knowledge, through reason, independent of the body, and its limitations and hindrances. However, this is still assuming that Socrates is the authority on the subject by virtue of being the source (one of the founders of Western Philosophy). As you can see from the introduction, the definitions provided by the two information brokers of our age, Google and Wikipedia (who uses Charles Spurgeon’s definition), are not exactly in alignment with Socrates. I mean to say, the emphasis on right use or experience, are both lacking in this particular argument by Socrates, and it is clearly his most descriptive argument on the nature of Wisdom. Socrates never precluded the idea of right use of knowledge, but he also never attached that meaning to Wisdom; instead, attributing it to Just action and Justice. This is also in alignment with his statement that he has “no claim to wisdom” (Plato. p. 44) when in Plato’s Apology, Socrates argues that his service to society is in proving to the “wise” that they have no actual claim to wisdom, as that is the realm of God, and the only true Human wisdom, is in knowing their lack of; once again, alluding to this concept of Idealism {the premise that all the qualities of things have true essences or forms, and that the reality we experience is witnessed through the pale imitation of these forms (Plato, p. 140)} as it relates to Wisdom. Socrates also would have also probably scoffed at the idea that Wisdom was in anyway intimately linked to experience as that was the domain of the body and senses, and thus the antagonist of Wisdom.

After examining the source of modern western philosophy, we are still left wanting for a definition of what Wisdom really is though. As, you either accept things as Socrates states them, or you do not; and if you do not, then you must fill in the void of what that word means for you, to you. Personally, wisdom is the pursuit of understanding, and can be only independent of action in theory; not in practice, as action is always influenced by one’s knowledge and understanding. In this pursuit, there are different qualities of understanding the nature of something; and thus Wisdom is, to some degree, quantitative within its own constructs. Take for instance the following: A person racked with hunger, is lost in the woods; and he happens upon a man who has made his home there. There are many potential outcomes to this scenario; one, is that he will use force to sate his immediate needs, probably by theft (though assault is also a likely outcome). Another, however, is the recognition, that by virtue of the man having “fish” too cook, he must have a way of obtaining these fish, and a more reasonable and long term solution to his current problem, hunger, is better sated by inquiring how to obtain these fish instead. This is an example of exercising understanding. At one level, is the recognition of the knowledge, I have hunger, he has food, I need food. At the next, is the recognition of the knowledge, I have hunger, he has food, I need food, because he has food he must have a way of acquiring said food, if I ask after this method I can sustain myself for longer. This is a very physically oriented view of Understanding, meant to impart, and imply, that there are a multitude of levels toward understanding of any subject. Perhaps, that is what Socrates implies when he searches after the Truth, the essence of things; Understanding. In that way we are really not so different in our definition, other than on the emphasis of its primary components.

The importance that understanding plays in my view of Wisdom is important enough that I feel I must explore this aspect of it further. When I say, Understanding, note that I capitalize it. This is because it is not just a passing familiarity with a subject, idea or situation, but implies something deeper and more meaningful. It is becoming intimate with such things, it is intimacy. I cannot put it better than this: “Intimacy is the state of being intimate. Intimate is characterized by pronounced closeness of friendship, relationship or association. It is deeply personal and private and the state of intimacy results from a close study of, or familiarity with, something or someone. Being intimate pertains to the innermost nature or being of what is studies and deals with that which is essential or intrinsic to that something. To be intimate with someone or something means we know its inner and outer workings. . . . Intimacy is about a level of knowing that cannot be described but only experienced and it is in the experience that one knows.” (K. Ferlic, 2009) Intimacy plays a very important role in Tantra, and many other Asian philosophies, it implies complete engagement; which is why sexual energy is so prevalent in its teachings and methods. It is that aspect of intimacy and complete engagement they desire to impart and probably what has had the most impact on my understanding of Wisdom. Intimacy and thus Understanding, is an ongoing process and one can be surprised at the various levels of complexity and subtle nuances that surround an idea or topic, as they are uncovered through meditation, reflection, or “recollection” as Socrates would probably put it.

There exists more to Wisdom than Understanding however, as there would be no need for a separate word if understanding and intimacy sufficed. It is a way of moving through the world with this intimate knowledge, a method of interacting with reality based upon this intimacy and understanding, gained from experience and reflection. It is, the application of this deeper knowledge in a manner in accordance with the larger picture. Taoists call it harmony with the Way, Tantric Practice calls it Self-Awareness, Stoics probably referred to it as being in tune with the rhythms of the natural (though I am not as familiar with them as I would like). It implies some form of intuition based insight, gleaned from your intimacy with reality, as to how to act and why, making leaps of logic others would fail to see. It is this aspect of Wisdom, that makes it so hard to define precisely.

Wisdom will probably continue to be a vague notion; easily understood through experiencing, yet difficult to impart with mere words. I was conducting research for this project and recently read an article in which a research group tried to gain an empirical knowledge of what it is to be wise, what is wisdom? They asked 60 experts on the nature of wisdom from around the world to participate in a study, in which they were asked questions about the nature of Wisdom, to see if some unifying theme that was empirical in nature could be gleaned from their answers. Of the ones that showed up, no unifying definition of what it means to be wise could be constructed. What they did come up with was the following:

“It is uniquely human.

It is a form of advanced cognitive and emotional development that is experience-driven.

It is a personal quality, albeit rare.

It can be learned, increases with age and can be measured.

It is probably not enhanced by taking medication.” (Medical News Today, 2010)

It is uniquely human, homo-sapiens, the wise man. Interesting to note that when Carolus Linnaeus changed the genus name of humans from diurnis to sapiens, he was choosing to a trait so widely regarded as rare, yet so intrinsically part of humanity, a trait few can agree as to its true meaning. And yet, it seems so fitting, our natural curiosity and need to know more, to understand more... to become more. Sapience is defined as having great Wisdom; and man’s preoccupation with philosophy is truly a love affair with Wisdom; his pursuit to define it, confine it, and take it into himself and become one with it; to exemplify it, and laud its merits to the whole of society. That, that it were not so rare a quality, and exhibited with a frequency worthy of the name, sapiens. That, Sapience were inescapably intrinsic to what it means to be and become human. Perhaps that is the idealized form, an omen of eras of enlightenment to come, or just mere praise of man’s intellect misunderstanding the nature of Wisdom. It is something to think on.

Works Cited:

Google. (n.d.) Google.com. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from Google.com Web site: https://www.google.com/search?q=Wisdom+definition&oq=Wisdom+definition&aqs=chrome..69i57.5427j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Charles Spurgeon. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from BrainyQuote.com Web site:http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/charlesspu121393.html

Plato. (2003). The Last Days of Socrates. (H. Tredennick & H. Tarrant, Trans.). London: Penguin Classics.

K. Ferlic. (2009) The need for physical intimacy. Retrieved September 9, 2013 from Andcreativity.com Web site: http://andcreativity.info/creativesexuality/need_for_physical_intimacy.htm

Bibliography:

Wisdom (2013, September 1)Wikipedia.org Retrieved September 9, 2013, from Wikipedia.org Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom

n.p. (2010, May 10). "What Is Wisdom? Experts Define It." Medical News Today. Retrieved September 9, 2013 from: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/188170.php.