Except children can be wise and you’re just stereotyping. If wisdom was experience or “real knowledge” as you put it then I expect every 60+ year old to be wise and rich with “real knowledge”. It isn’t the case because you don’t have to gain wisdom only through your own experience, it can be through others experience as well. Wisdom doesn’t require experience. It requires a drive to learn more, to be reasonable, logical, understanding and what not. You don’t have to experience anything as long as you have the drive to learn from what others experience around you. So no, it doesn’t require just experience.
That’s what almost every old being has to say. “Oh, you’re not wiser than me. I am 70 years old and you’re just 20.” Yeah, well if you don’t have the drive to learn more then your experience can be less than what that drive offers in just a few years.
Artimas, this is where we take a word and apply too much meaning to it. You don’t really believe that a genius is necessarily wise at the same time do you? Wisdom is more intuitive - a genius may also be intuitive but there are many geniuses in life who are not able to practice true wisdom - in other words, the ability to know the right thing to do or withhold from doing because of the inner awareness and realization of let’s say cause and effect.
A genius may have the highest IQ but not necessarily the highest EQ - emotional quotient which I kind of intuit as being more in harmony with wisdom but I may be wrong - but i don’t think so. lol
Sometimes geniuses cause problems to happen. Who is your hero? I wonder if Oppenheimer would have felt that he was also wise because of his genius.
Wisdom is combination of knowledge and experience together, turning ideal knowledge into real knowledge.
Without wisdom and experience, knowledge only can be ideal, never real. This is the reason that causes childish fantasies, imagination, and dream worlds.
Children are not born into the “real world” due to their motherly, parental protections. Infants are born into a solipsistic mindstate, protected from their infantile vulnerabilities.
An infant is never wiser than an adult, just as an infant is never stronger nor smarter than an adult.
Infants are never born powerful. All infancy is defined by weakness. An adult is always more powerful than an infant. There is never an exception to this rule.
It could be partly good genes and DNA and also the example of their parents who may be wise. That wisdom may be kind of inherent in them too as a result of the genes. Who knows.
Sometimes much younger people can be wiser because their brains/minds are not so cluttered so they can see right to the point of it not being hampered by that clutter.
Experience alone is not the criteria for wisdom but the true reflecting on that experience and coming to the realization of what that reality is made of and then acting on that.
Maybe true but not necessarily. We know at times but refuse to open ourselves up to the experience which it can bring to us.
The awesome possibility of all that comes before it. I look up at the stars and that may become a true experience for me. It does. It is in the not-knowing of everything or of a certain thing where the experience of the mystery comes from.
So there is great mystery in not knowing, great curiosity in not knowing. It’s conception.
The experience of mystery pawns knowledge everytime or at least in my book is equal to it unless that knowledge is not so set in stone and can be changed into something new and more worthy of experience.
“But” is not a well chosen word in your sentence, Artimas, because it does not change (for example: relativise or even falsify) the meaning of the statement that wisdom is more than knowledge, e.g. that wisdom is the use of knowledge in a wise direction. It takes knowledge to know how to use knowledge, yes, and if one uses the knowledge in a wise direction, then this one is wise, can be called “a wise person” or “a person with wisdom”.
If …, yes. Knowledge is not power but can mean power.
If knowledge is not always power, then one can hardly say that knowledge “is” power; so one should rather say that knowledge can mean power but is not power.
It is very probable that those with the most knowledge do not have the most power, and it is also very probable that those with the most power do not have the most knowledge (in order to remain powerful they need merely an average knowledge and a few people with more than the average knowledge who depend on them). For example: each boss of a company does not always have more knowledge than the underlings of this boss; the situation, especially in the long run, that some underlings have more knowledge than their boss is more probable.
The way to promote ideas in the West is to create a very short meme that expresses the basic idea even though the pedantics aren’t necessarily in order such as, “time is money”, “less is more”, “bad is good”, “bigger is better”, “anything is possible”, “might is right”, and “knowledge is power”.
Socially wise people know to not take such things pedantically literal. They are meant to be taken as “more-or-less true” depending on the circumstances and something to consider to be relevant.
An infant is not as aware as an adult because it’s brain/body is not as developed. So no one is born with common sense? How can that be true when there are people who have genius come naturally to them.
