The Two Faces of Wisdom Wisdom as a General Theory of Knowledge and Judgment about Excellence in Mind and Virtue vs. Wisdom as Everyday Realization in People and Products

• Published in: Human development Vol. 47; no. 5; pp. 290 - 299
• Main Authors: Baltes, Paul B., Kunzmann, Ute
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel, Switzerland S. Karger AG 01.01.2004; S
• Subjects: Academic Discourse; Behavioural sciences; Character; Cognition; Cognition & reasoning; Cognitive Processes; Cognitive psychology; Commentary; Comparative analysis; Correlation; Developmental Psychology; Epistemology; Experts; Inquiry; Knowledge; Lifelong Learning; Mind; Personality Theories; Personality traits; Philosophy; Rationality; Resistance (Psychology); Social Cognition; Sociology of knowledge; Theory; Way of life; Wisdom; World Views; Sages; Virtue; Wisdom; Mind; Human rationality
• ISSN: 0018-716X; 1423-0054
• DOI: 10.1159/000079156

There are several legitimate ways of conceptualizing and studying wisdom. One is largely informed by Western philosophy and treats wisdom as an analytic theory of expert knowledge, judgment, and advice about difficult and uncertain matters of life. Another is more consistent with Asian philosophical non-secularized traditions and treats wisdom as instantiated by wise persons or their products. The second approach is always but an approximation to the analytically constructed utopia of wisdom. Wise persons are approximations to wisdom, but they are not wisdom. Ardelt’s critique of our work proposes that our theoretical conception of wisdom as a body of expert knowledge in a specific subject matter is similar to ‘cold’ cognition. We disagree and assert that our conception of wisdom includes as antecedents, correlates, and consequences a rich spectrum of specific cognitive, emotional, motivational and social factors as well as life contexts. Our empirical research unequivocally supports this multidimensional and collaborative view.