In a recent New York Times Article, Hall (2007) provides a succinct and interesting account of the body of formal knowledge surrounding Wisdom.
He believes, like Merriam, Caffarella & Baumgartner (2007), that Erickson popularized the study of Wisdom from an adult learning perspective opening the door to broad, far reaching discussions concerning age as it relates to Wisdom. Unfortunately, the question continues to rage about the precise definition of Wisdom and whether age entitles you to Wisdom, or whether age is merely one component necessary to possessing Wisdom.
In presenting the case for determining whether Wisdom is the hallmark of adult learning, Merriam et al. (2007) fail to tie in the role of cognitive development in obtaining Wisdom. In fact they state that “…although it has been discussed over the ages by the great philosophers and the theologians, this area of study has received little attention in the literature on cognitive development and learning in general” (p. 358).
It would therefore seem to make sense to briefly discuss the probable impact the two most formidable approaches to adult cognitive development, dialectical and contextual, may have on gaining Wisdom. Dialectical knowledge is the ability to consider multiple points of view, or to compare and contrast opposing points of view. Merriam et al. (2007) point out that “a number of authors have posited that dialectical ways of thinking must become part of the way adults think” (p.342). In defending the critical nature of dialectical thinking in adult adaptation and survival, Merriam et al. indicate that Kegan and others consider this skill critical for survival in an ever-changing world. Given the nature of Wisdom, we can draw a parallel between some of the requirements of Wisdom and the ability to think dialectically.
In a similar manner, contextual thinking must surely play an equally important role in developing Wisdom. Since an individual would only know of Wisdom, and wise individuals because of an outward manifestation of wise thinking, we must determine that all Wisdom is taken in the context of the evaluator of the Wisdom itself. We can also determine that wise individuals have a context for making wise decisions and the like. For instance, Hall, in his article indicates that Ghandi is commonly referred to as the wisest individual by college students. How would college students be able to determine the depth of his Wisdom unless they had the context to understand his thinking and teachings? Although Gahandi may not have had the opportunity to teach each and every individual, his wisdom includes context so broad it affects and appeals to a wide number of people.
We can therefore conclude that both dialectical and contextual knowledge contributes to Wisdom. In what amounts, we will leave both to the debate at hand and the context in which it is cast. In the end analysis, we can safely say that an understanding of the nature of dialectic and contextual thinking will, at minimum, make us more aware of the avenues by which one gains Wisdom. In applying these principles in adult learning situations, one will be in a better position to teach by methods that will enable him or herself become wiser as well.
References:
Hall, S.S. (2007, May 6). The older-and-wiser hypothesis. New York Times. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from http://www.nytimes.com
Link for further reading: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/magazine/06Wisdom-t.html?ei=5070&en=227098c58593f00a&ex=1182398400&pagewanted=print
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Valerie J. Whitocmb
PhD AMDS – Learning Management