What is Wisdom?

I. Has your bet of acquaintance changed since the beginning of the course? Explain how and why. Since the beginning of the course, my view of wisdom remained the same. However, I was able to enrich my knowledge because of the definitions and discussion on the casing by the diverse philosophers whose ideas of wisdom greatly shaped the word. After pickings the course I was able to come up with the conclusion that wisdom butt end be desexualised differently according to observations of a individual towards how wisdom is beingness used or misused. Interestingly, even scholars and the learned substantiate their respective sets of definition for wisdom.However, it entrust compose be evident that in the bottom line, wisdom go out fluent be one thing and this is how a somebody uses the qualification of his mind to create or solve decisions. There are things in my preliminary es hypothesize which I questioned passim the course. One example is the thought that wisdom is the use of intellect. There were time in the course of study where wisdom is discussed in terms of emotion, or the center of attention. This made me wonder whether wisdom is purely the minds work, and assessing the different definitions I came into the conclusion that my preliminary thoughts were on-key.Still, there are parts in my former definition of wisdom that changed. I pointed out early on that wisdom amongst children and the younger adults whitethorn be lacking due to being inexperienced which I now proved separate immaterial. As Thoreau points out, the older a wise person becomes the less his wisdom becomes signifi supportt because of saucy things and developments that authorise everyday. Thus, there are certain aspects where a child or a young adult whitethorn know much than than while an older, more experienced person know less or nothing active. In the same way, old knowledge may be more familiar to an older person when compared to a younger one.Yet I still remain f aithful to the fact that the definitions pertinent to wisdom are numerous, as I pointed out in my preliminary essay. Wisdom can be identified with the current pre-occupation of the person defining itwhereas a scientist may fixate wisdom in a scientific way, a teacher may define it in an instructive way, and a student may define it in a learners way. The possibilities in which wisdom may be defined are endless. II. Whose view (Socrates, Thoreau, Huxley, Piper, or Frankl) seems to be approximately comely? Why?Of the views discussed in class, Thoreaus is the most significant. He express that a mans wisdom and ignorance are results of his time, citing the yield of pile to superstition of their time as an example. (Creating Minds, 2007) This is especially true even to this day and long time. A person may be wise for his age, but new studies, inventions, and scholarly developments can tend to outdate his wisdom and in the process slip in other people who can seem wiser an fuller be cause their knowledge is out-of-the-way(prenominal) more updated that the wise people ahead of them.In hindsight, this is why a person would never cease learning, because once he does his wisdom will definitely deteriorate. Mencken states that the older he grows he realized that wisdom does not come of age. This is ratified by Van Buren, who likened wisdom coming from age with wine saying it a person will only be wise with age like wine if the grapes are good becoming to begin with. (Moncur, 2007) True enough, knowledge does not come of age. Wisdom is brought about by a never-ending free-flow of knowledge despite age.Children and young adults can get a deep vigorous of wisdom if they are do to learn, and adults will also improve on their wisdom if they do not stop learning. Continuous learning is an important aspect of sustaining wisdom, whereby new selective information consistently is being added up to ones well of knowledge which he can process and use to make sound and wise decisions. To be wholly wise, it is important that a person gets out of his somfort zona and try things that are not normally done by soul his age, or someone whose occupation is similar to him.When a person is not open to learn new things, even if he has the age power to learn them, he will be outdated with information and his well of wisdom gets short of this additional information. III. Whose view (Socrates, Thoreau, Huxley, Piper, or Frankl) seems to be the least(prenominal) reasonable? Why? Of the views discussed in class, Frankls is the least reasonable. To begin with, he insists that wisdom comes from the heart and that this can make wisdom more advised than the wisdom wrought from the mind.Given that this is factual in its deepest sense, wisdom still goes back to being a function of the mind. Questioning everything, Lichtenberg said, is the first yard to wisdomand altogether learning that everything is the last step to wisdom. (Moncur, 2007) Therefore, it is difficult to accept that wisdom from the heart, though claimed more sensible, is the real essence of wisdom. It is true that wisdom can be affected by what the heart feels, but the capability to be wise is exclusively spawned by the mind. There may be contentions to this.A charity worker, for example, may prove it wise to day that true wisdom comes from the heart because the nature of the work he is in touches more in emotion. On the other hand, a scholar whose preoccupation is more on knowledge and improving this knowledge will prove this otherwise. Again, definitions will vary according to who is defining the word. Yet it is still improbable to say that this is reasonable as compared to wisdoms other definitions by other scholars and philosophers, especially those whose ideas were discussed in class.This sums up how the work of the mind breeds wisdom. It is not the heart which is wise. Emotions bred by the heart are also not acceptable, as scientifically it has been noted that it is the hy pothalamus and not the heart that is capable of telling a person how to respond through emotions. In summation, this says that Frankls definition of wisdom can be misinterpreted in a lot of ways, and thus it is the least reasonable as compared to the definitions by other philosophers whose definitions were discussed in class.