Wisdom versus Logic....

In short, wisdom is knowledge known and knowledge understood. There two different natures of knowledge: Factual knowledge and knowledge of the truth. While many may possess volumes of knowledge, that same knowledge is not always understood by that person. Logic itself can't be used by a person but instead are processed "logical processes". Since logic is processed, those processes are subject to the individual "contingent". Because logical processes are subject to the man himself only wisdom can get to the truth and not logical processes. Some are wise by way of factual knowledge and others are wise when pertaining to truth. These are "truth" statements, which brings about the question: which knowledge do you possess? Factual knowledge, truth knowledge or both?

a reply to: auto3000

Knowledge is a realization of truth of the unknown.

Wisdom is a realization of learning from the misunderstanding of the known.

a reply to: auto3000

But knowledge can often times be limited to the accepted understanding of things around the individual, and we all know that understandings--and the knowledge that accompanies them--can change as time goes on and new discoveries are made.

So, wisdom--based on knowledge--can be faulty, being based on neither truth nor fact. Of course, the term "truth" is subjective, so there's that monkey wrench, too.

Logic is based on rules that govern how it is applied to a given problem or situation. Logic can provide differing results by different individuals dealing with the same problem, so while there is the individual 'human element' that can fog things up and cause incorrect results, the same can be said about wisdom and the knowledge that accompanies it.

My question, I suppose, would be this: If both can lead to faulty results, what's your point in asking your question?

Also, I would desire a nice balance between vetted (as well I can for the time period that I exist) wisdom and logic, and I don't think one is superior to the other, necessarily.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

re: "...the term 'truth' is subjective..."


Can you give an example of a subjective truth?

originally posted by: rstrats
a reply to: SlapMonkey

re: "...the term 'truth' is subjective..."


Can you give an example of a subjective truth?

UFO's and Ghosts are real.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Good point, here's the flaw in that philosophy....knowledge of truth is knowledge of absolute objective reality and therefor has no essence of failure or spot....what you are referring to is factual knowledge.

a reply to: rstrats

That would be a fallacy.....truth is absolute and can't be bound to subjectivity.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Knowledge is awareness by way of information or observation....what you don't want to end up doing is becoming the reference for objective meaning despite the objective reference and nature of words.

Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put a tomato in the fruit salad.

Google definition says logic (in a way) is computed and absolute truth. Where wisdom is by experience, neither true or false. Like a Wiseman one says (because he experienced something). Or when computing 0+0=0 is absolute (if you count marbles for example).
But, wisdom (experience) can be absolute, if the fool who experiences the same thing, thus repeating a calculated truth.

originally posted by: luciferslight
Google definition says logic (in a way) is computed and absolute truth.....Logic: (reasoning) conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity....these are subjective processes...in other words...suggestions to "consider" as true in a valid way...see the the issue? Wisdom: The QUALITY of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise. Note the word quality of having and not just "having" experience and knowledge. This is an attribute...experience is in two fashions, this is why it's defined that way....experiencing through "physical events" and experiencing abstract objective realities like truth, this is done through spiritual apprehension (not specifically referring to religion, but does take place in religions)....but good point, I see where you were going with that.

a reply to: Edumakated Haa...I like that one....

originally posted by: auto3000
There two different natures of knowledge: Factual knowledge and knowledge of the truth. These are "truth" statements, which brings about the question: which knowledge do you possess? Factual knowledge, truth knowledge or both?

"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool." - William Shakespear

a reply to: Iamonlyhuman
Very good post......

a reply to: auto3000

"Knowledge of the truth.'" Please can you give some examples of this.

I understand intuition, that uncanny knowing one gets about something, but truth seems to vary from person to person, especially if you study witness statements of an incident etc.

When religion is involved, blind faith was made a virtue however, with our world being slanted to the view there is a scientific explanation for everything, which can be reproduced time and again blind faith seems acceptable to the more gullible, so is 'knowledge of the truth' now the new way of saying blind faith?

originally posted by: rstrats
a reply to: SlapMonkey

re: "...the term 'truth' is subjective..."


Can you give an example of a subjective truth?

While Sublimecraft made a quick example of it--which, a UFO- and Ghost-denier's subjective truth would be that they do not exist--truthiness, as Stephen Colbert would say, is dependent upon that which someone thinks that they know on the conscious level.

Many people have come to know truths in their lives based on things that they know--but what is not taken into consideration is the unknown (facts that exist without the individual's knowledge). And just because that unknown exists in reality but not in the mind of the individual does not negate its existence. So, to the individual, they KNOW something is TRUTH, even if it is not.

This is why people can pass a polygraph test when police know that they're not telling the truth--either they believe it because they are ignorant to the unknowns, or they have led themselves to believing something is true when it's not. It's possible to convince yourself of a lie that it becomes the truth in your mind, and there's no scientific distinction between the two as it pertains to the individual.

I know these may not be explained very well, but the bottom line is that someone can believe something to be true, even if it's not. To that person, it's still the truth--a subjective truth.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: auto3000

Knowledge is a realization of truth of the unknown.

Easy there tiger.....

There is also knowledge that can be wrong, eg: mistaken or ignorant, so 'knowledge' is basically just 'information' right OR wrong isn't it? Ironically, 'Wisdom' would fit your description better me thinks....

'Wisdom' is a realisation of truth of the unknown.

Things like Sixth Sense and Intuition etc can play a part here where only experience and time can enable the wisdom which engages without the need for so much of the information relating to the subject at hand.

Wisdom is a realization of learning from the misunderstanding of the known.

So what you're saying is that 'wisdom' only comes from getting things wrong. What about understanding the UNknown by incorporating much of what I wrote above about intuition and sixth sense? Can we not also understand something because we understand something else and relate the two without the need for the misunderstanding?

All I know is that my head hurts and for that I thank you all. Must...think...more....

a reply to: auto3000

You are incorrect. While a "known truth" that wasn't true would be a fallacy, what you claim in your OP is that wisdom, based on knowledge, is the only absolute way to discover the objective truth.

I disagree with the foundation of your argument.

You appear to disagree with mine. And that's okay, but just remember that history has shown many a "wise" person to have wisdom based on subjectivity--wisdom based on truths that discount the unknown realities of the time, but are the only known truths to that "wise" individual.

But quite honestly, I feel like you are arguing semantics from the start, and that it would be wise for me to bow out of this thread because I don't see the logic in continuing the discussion.

Here's the difference by example: UFOs exist..that's either fact or fiction......Humans have a soul...that's either true or false.....When someone has factual knowledge, their knowledge is centered around fact or fictional concepts....knowledge of truth is based around true or false concepts...if you can or could know it through physically observing it or if it involves a physical desciption, then it's factually based and not truth based

a reply to: SlapMonkey
You are still referring to factual knowledge.....we are posting back and forth about two different natures of knowledge.