This is a response to a comment on my post: Is Knowledge Really A Building Pt. 2
I ended the post with asking where we should go now after having found the idea of a building or web of knowledge somewhat problematic in my own understanding and then a person asked “What about wisdom?”
I am not entirely sure what the commentator meant so I will just take it as I interpret their comment. As a place to go to sort out knowledge I certainly cannot disagree with wisdom being a sort of knowledge, even if my wisdom is limited from a lack of years. The problem though, from how I understand empiricism, is still how do we know that a person’s wisdom is truly “knowledge” what is it based upon? How did it come to be known? Is it true? etc. etc.
So, in that way I do not know what about wisdom.
In another way though, I believe there is a way of understanding knowledge with wisdom. Wisdom is the recognition that all knowledge that is scientifically approved or logically approved is only one way of seeing and understanding the world. A wise person sees that qualifying everything that is “known” and trying to justify that it is “known” is a somewhat problematic position to be in because one is attempting to classify and logicize human experience. Science and logic may be able to do a lot of things, explain a lot of things to us but, in the end, there is a missing part to the scientific account. The experience itself. Wisdom is a recognition of dearth of knowledge in scientific knowledge.
Wisdom recognizes that memories are going to inflict the present with their presumptions, emotions and images and in turn change how a person is going to deal with a situation. Wisdom in this recognition also, I think, would have a general idea of the events that every human being is likely to go through and some of the basic sorts of experiences all humans have or will have.
So, that is a rough sketch of wisdom as I am coming to understand it and my response.