The Love Of Wisdom

So, lets review,

Socrates is credited with exerting a powerful influence upon the founders of Western philosophy, most particularly Plato and Aristotle, and Aristotle went on to teach Alexander The Great, and what is Alexander known for?

Socrates seems to have often said that his wisdom was limited to an awareness of his own ignorance. Socrates may have believed that wrongdoing was a consequence of ignorance, that those who did wrong knew no better. The one thing Socrates consistently claimed to have knowledge of was "the art of love" which he connected with the concept of "the love of wisdom", i.e., philosophy.

Please don't make me think so much, too hard!

Sorry if I didn't have this bad cold I wouldn't be thinking so hard. It is the drugs and listening to the Blues.

I'm feeling that! it reminds me of what jesus said, "father forgive them for they know not what they do" (please no bible bashing cause I don't want to get off this subject) that story is the perfect example of love for someone else, enough to pray for them like that. And what it says in proverbs "soft words turn away anger" it is wise to promote love because it's the only thing that can defeat anger and by defeating it, we are free from the folly and able to rise to new hieghts.

I find comfort in what Christ told the gentleman beside him on the cross. The Lord was in a world of hurt, but still found time to comfort another. Another example of soft words.

I like the part about, "Awareness of one's own ignorance." I've thought of wisdom as a lifetime of learning, which leads to the ability to ask better questions.

"Ignorance is not a sin, but it's a damned waste."

That wasn't from a famous philosopher, I heard it off some crappy period drama my mam was watching.

to be blatantly honest, im in love with wisdom, sometimes i hate wisdom, but im still in love with it, thats wisdom,

on that point... i dont think that its so much that its a point of ignorance... people just have different values... wrongdoing comes with a different definition for them...

in socrates' view, wisdom is probably more important than most individual values, and less individual as well.

in other words, he's referring to objective, not subjective wisdom, and the ignorance he speaks of goes beyond superficial disagreements.

all wisdom is subjective... there is no solid basis for measuring how wise a person is... its all a matter of opinion and everyones opinions are based off of the views that they have learned in their individual lives... we are subjectively defining a subjective concept...

just my view... on superficial and important matters...

oh that's fine, but i'm trying to explain the meaning behind his use of the word. i very much think he's referring to objectivity, i'm not suggesting that true objectivity is something that we can obtain and use in everyday life or even philosophical textbooks, which means for any practical purposes you are quite correct.

but i do think that what socrates was speaking of is something we can strive for, and that striving creates a greater wisdom and lesser ignorance.

what i think of objectivity is that while it is impossible for us to be "objective" (that would be like all-knowing,) it is possible to know more, and become more objective. we all suffer from subjectivity, where subjectivity is a view that is more narrow than total awareness. so we gain more objectivity by having a wider view, and greater subjectivity by having a narrower view. thus striving for wisdom and losing ignorance is about gaining a larger perspective, something anyone is capable of, and what i think socrates is really talking about. the word objective is still important though, in my opinion.

u explained socrates' point well... i was just arguing against it...

and ur right... well never achieve wisdom if we dont strive for it and strive to define it... my argument really doesnt inspire one to do that... though i still dont think ignorance has anything to do with it, but then again... who am i to argue with socrates...

thanks! the other thing about objectivity is the paradox where knowledge itself creates subjectivity.

that is, if you know something, you have a bias. i know the sky is blue, so if someone explains that it's red, i assume they are nuts. nevermind that i've never seen a sunset. but i've seen the sky get light and pink at midnight, too.

i think socrates explains that the only way to know anything is to not know anything, and this is also a form of objectivity, which is naturally out of reach as long as we know anything

when i was referring to "knowing more," i was actually talking about awareness of different views, which are helpful when weighing knowledge. less useful to memorize facts than be aware of many different views, and at least know how you got to the "fact" you currently hold onto. you're less attached to an idea then, in case it just so happens you were incorrect.

this would suggest that "older and wiser" isn't a phrase born of people accumulating knowledge as much as people gradually realizing how many things they've been incorrect about. a 70 year old know-it-all isn't too much wiser than a 17-year-old one.

i think on that concept socrates is simply too philosophical, if you know what i meant by that...

objectivity can be showed/measured without complications as far as my understanding... so... the sky is still objectively blue, but there are exceptions based on the time of day, weather, etc... its all still objective...

i think that knowing nothing to know everything is his concept of wisdom stretched too far... we should always be open to the fact that we could be wrong and listen to what the other side is, but we have to know our own point first... we have to know their point... we cant know nothing...