Wisdom

[Asmodean]

I submit that wisdom is also a measure of the individuals ability to avoid shooting oneself in the foot.

Asmo's Cartesian scheme might make an interesting graph. A rather flat parabola I would guess.  something like (1-a/b)^n.....or not. In any case the philosophic implications of this discussion is a credit to the ones who have commented.

Actually, I think it would be a complex function. Yes, I think it starts off as a flat positive-a parabola, but experience dictates that past a certain point, the y-values may recede again.

May it have something to do with the very intelligent simply not needing to be wise to the same degree as the less intelligent, I wonder? If one has the capacity to solve complex problems "on the fly," does it not stand to reason that one would need less of a capacity to make experience and/or personal sensibility based calls? Yes, it's re-inventing the wheel every time, but I must admit I sort of do it myself as often as not.

[Dave]

I see intelligence as the ability to apply one's knowledge and experience to life situations.

That sounds like crystallised intelligence!

I think the subject of intelligence and wisdom is fascinating, but neither term is easy to define. Cognitive abilities such as the ability to learn, reason, solve problems, think in abstract terms, apply experience, think strategically are important. Even all kinds of memory and the ability to retrieve what is learnt plays a role in what defines intelligence.

Perhaps intuition deserves to be listed as well? 

Hmm, intuition . . .

Action or decision without apparently going through a process of reasoning; instinctive, reflexive, reactive or whatever.  Not always reliable but great if it works!


OK, the Gloucester Theory:
Now, if it is similar to a hunch then I always think it is because the mind has an almost indipendent way of processing, analysing and synthesising, available data very quickly. Our minds "pattern search" very well - it was essential to primitive hominids and still is (especially when driving!) today. Taking in a situation at a glance we cannot decypher every part of the pattern every time, our brains learned to just pick out the anomalies and concentrate on them.

As we developed the ability to process abstract data we could also apply this to almost everything, every situation, not just searching the savanah for sight of the sabre toothed rabbit or something.

So, we don't know it conciously but most of the "intuitive" decision may be already in our generic "pattern library" simply requiring the final part to "complete the picture" in a specific sense. This could happen subconciously and very quickly.  Thus experience, as varied as possible, is essential to intuition. But, of course, there will be a genetic component in who has this facility and how well it develops.

Strong implications for early learning here!

Hmm, I wonder if there is a correlation between intuition and stressful early experience? Does the abused child learn to "pattern search" better than the one experiencing a secure life?

[xSilverPhinx]

Hmm, I wonder if there is a correlation between intuition and stressful early experience? Does the abused child learn to "pattern search" better than the one experiencing a secure life?

Interesting question.

I don't know much about child development but they do say that an enriched environment does seem to mean better cognitive abilities in later life while too much stress is known to kill brain cells.

What could happen is an abused child might develop robust and pathological memories which are generalised to other contexts - in other words, PTSD. Pattern searching might go awry and the child might see threats where there are none, triggered by these types of memories. 

[Dave]

Hmm, I wonder if there is a correlation between intuition and stressful early experience? Does the abused child learn to "pattern search" better than the one experiencing a secure life?

Interesting question.

I don't know much about child development but they do say that an enriched environment does seem to mean better cognitive abilities in later life while too much stress is known to kill brain cells.

What could happen is an abused child might develop robust and pathological memories which are generalised to other contexts - in other words, PTSD. Pattern searching might go awry and the child might see threats where there are none, triggered by these types of memories.

Good points, xSP. I was thinking of situations where the individual might need to be somewhat more aware if his or her environment than someone in a relaxed ambiance. Yes, too much stress is a serious barrier and there is a shole spread of stress degree and individual response.

What I have remembered from years of browsing on this sort if stuff is tbat "primitive" cultures tend to develop better "pattern" seeking and recognition skills than those in developed cultures. The "tray test" seems to indicate this. "Natural" objects, a black stone, a snail shell etc., are placed on a tray and covered. The subject is then given a 30 second view of tbe tray and asked, immediately, then after 10 minutes and so on, to list the items and their positions relative to each other. In Australia aborigine kids, though taught in the same schools, scored consistently better than kids of immigrant families. Can't be sure but IIRC they were also asked to make up a story, to "rationalise" the objects.

The "stress" of 40,000+ years, until very recent times in comparison,  of searching for food and not being food oneself must have an impact on inherent skills. Familiarity breeds security as well as contempt, it is the anomaly - the sudden shift in colour or shape, the unexpected that changes a pattern learned over time that alerts the mind.

You drive down a familiar road without really seeing tbe builrings, street furniture etc but you are aware of every other car, cyclist, pedestrian, object in the road and so forth - anomalies in the pattern. You make instant decisions if you are threatened and often have to go over it several times before working out what you actually did.

Later edit.

Are you acting instintively on an instant flash of intuition, loads of calculations on time and space in a split second, or by using a "pattern" from your "library" to be able to concentrate on the small amount of data that is relevant to the immediate threat? Then using a reaction that is "pre-rehearsed"? I think that those who, at lesst mentally, rehearse events have a better chance of surviving them in the real world.

OK, specific event, have not yet considered this with respect to less threatening events but would need to compare any links between life experience and event type. Serious uni degree stuff there!

[xSilverPhinx]

What I have remembered from years of browsing on this sort if stuff is tbat "primitive" cultures tend to develop better "pattern" seeking and recognition skills than those in developed cultures. The "tray test" seems to indicate this. "Natural" objects, a black stone, a snail shell etc., are placed on a tray and covered. The subject is then given a 30 second view of tbe tray and asked, immediately, then after 10 minutes and so on, to list the items and their positions relative to each other. In Australia aborigine kids, though taught in the same schools, scored consistently better than kids of immigrant families. Can't be sure but IIRC they were also asked to make up a story, to "rationalise" the objects.

That would be testing working memory (recalling the objects right after exposure) and short term memory (recalling 10 minutes later). Having good memories might have been selected for in more primitive cultures, where people had to remember where each resource was located in their natural environments, such as food and waterholes. There could very well be a genetic basis.

The "stress" of 40,000+ years, until very recent times in comparison,  of searching for food and not being food oneself must have an impact on inherent skills. Familiarity breeds security as well as contempt, it is the anomaly - the sudden shift in colour or shape, the unexpected that changes a pattern learned over time that alerts the mind.

You drive down a familiar road without really seeing tbe builrings, street furniture etc but you are aware of every other car, cyclist, pedestrian, object in the road and so forth - anomalies in the pattern. You make instant decisions if you are threatened and often have to go over it several times before working out what you actually did. You acted instintively on an instant flash of intuition, loads of calculations on time and space in a split second.~

Perception is an interesting thing, especially since the brain generates a good deal of our reality based on expectation. 

[xSilverPhinx]

Have you read Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior by Leonard Mlodinow?

I recommend it.

[Dave]

What I have remembered from years of browsing on this sort if stuff is tbat "primitive" cultures tend to develop better "pattern" seeking and recognition skills than those in developed cultures. The "tray test" seems to indicate this. "Natural" objects, a black stone, a snail shell etc., are placed on a tray and covered. The subject is then given a 30 second view of tbe tray and asked, immediately, then after 10 minutes and so on, to list the items and their positions relative to each other. In Australia aborigine kids, though taught in the same schools, scored consistently better than kids of immigrant families. Can't be sure but IIRC they were also asked to make up a story, to "rationalise" the objects.

That would be testing working memory (recalling the objects right after exposure) and short term memory (recalling 10 minutes later). Having good memories might have been selected for in more primitive cultures, where people had to remember where each resource was located in their natural environments, such as food and waterholes. There could very well be a genetic basis.

The "stress" of 40,000+ years, until very recent times in comparison,  of searching for food and not being food oneself must have an impact on inherent skills. Familiarity breeds security as well as contempt, it is the anomaly - the sudden shift in colour or shape, the unexpected that changes a pattern learned over time that alerts the mind.

You drive down a familiar road without really seeing tbe builrings, street furniture etc but you are aware of every other car, cyclist, pedestrian, object in the road and so forth - anomalies in the pattern. You make instant decisions if you are threatened and often have to go over it several times before working out what you actually did. You acted instintively on an instant flash of intuition, loads of calculations on time and space in a split second.~

Perception is an interesting thing, especially since the brain generates a good deal of our reality based on expectation.

Hmm, perhaps I grasp at straws trying to develop an idea that has been rumbling around in my mind for decades! Typical that I prefer to develop ideas then compare them with the literature! I have "re-invented" a few things because of this, always happiest when I later when I find that confirm things that I worked out from basic principles+empirical experience+observation . . . 

Need to think about this one in a more structured manner, if I can only hold my attention on it long enough and not get diverted by sonething new!

[xSilverPhinx]

Yes, it's great to discover things for yourself. 

[Icarus]

I just finished a book: Pale Horse. It is about the life and/or death decision making of the 101st airborne personnel in Afghanistan. Pale Horse was an attack helicopter squadron in the thick of the Afghan back country battles. A lot of helicopter pilots and support people had to get it right or suffer the consequences when in a firefight. The author, also the commander of the group, had chosen his people carefully. He believed that an individuals ability to respond appropriately to a dire situation was a built in faculty that did not depend entirely on age, experience, or training. He knew that some people are better at making rapid, considered, situational decisions. His male pilots and gunners, and one ferocious woman fighter pilot expended a lot of Hellfire missiles and 30mm cannon rounds in the process of almost continuous engagement with the enemy. The woman was/is every bit as good as the men at finding and killing the enemy and making split second decisions about how not to get blown out of the sky.

An interesting characteristic of the group is that officers were not the exclusive decision makers. Enlisted men could and did make many of the tactical battle decisions. The officers had bought into that concept and it worked well.

The call name of the squadron: Pale Horse,  is lifted from the KJV book of Revelations 6-8   Serious stuff.

[Dave]

Wondering if this thread should be in "Philosophy", getting a bit "sat-up" . 

OK, I am on the ''proper'' keyboard to save on typos and corrections!

A friend commented on how ''brave'' I was to tackle a problem with my loo cistern. This from a lady of 73 who can paint, do almost anything in the crochet/knitting/sewing line, by hand or machine. Watched me change the USB socket on her tablet and announced that she would do the next one herself. Has a history of working with horses (and that does mean work!) She has coped brilliantly with enough emotional and physical stress and pressure, during her late husband's long term illnesses and with an errant daughter to floor many people.

Yet she still seems to see herself as a ''mere woman''.

Last night there was a long email to her. Basically it said that gender had nothing to do with it. Our strengths lay partly in what we have learned from our education and experience, a genetic basis does apply... Our confidence comes from applying that learning and developing the ability to use bricks from one house of learning to build a new one. Not willing to be too put off by initial failure helps. As the experiences grow in number and ''volume'' so does confidence.

Positive experiences are best but even negative ones have a valid lesson very often.

Then, as in another thread, increasing maturity - maybe as a form of wisdon - helps. Is there feedback, experience and maturity/wisdom forming a loop? Experience being simply another form of education?

She has that in plenty.

[Kekerusey]

If wisdom is a function of intelligence, why are not more of the highly intelligent people also sagely-wise?

Harsh but fair ... I know many extremely clever people who aren't "wise".

Keke