Spring 2009 Wisdom Course Study Questions

Return to Wisdom

We'll use this page for major course study questions. They will be organized by class date and topic. Please add your notes and answers to specific study questions.

Jan 20: Greek/Hellenistic Wisdom 1

1. Contrast the model of wisdom in Socrates and Achilles. What might Plato be trying to say in drawing the comparison?

Socrates’ model of wisdom is a platonic model which is bases knowledge through logos; logos de-emphasizes emotions and focuses on rationality. In addition, Socrates thought in a dualistic manner and said that the body impedes the soul from obtaining true knowledge. Achilles on the other hand had a Homeric model of wisdom where he thought that true knowledge came from actions and emotions (mythos). It seems that Plato draws a comparison between Socrates and Achilles in the Santilli reading to demonstrate that despite being opposites, both Homeric wisdom and platonic wisdom can coexist and at times even integrate together to form a more complete model of wisdom.

2. What is Socratic wisdom?

3. How does Plato use myth to depict the state of the soul in wisdom, and in the pursuit of wisdom?

Plato’s philosophy marks the beginning of organizing thought in a more structured manner. This is the contrast between Homeric wisdom and Platonic wisdom; Homeric wisdom is embedded in action, like Achilles. Platonic wisdom emphasizes rationality and logos. Logos vs. Mythos – mythos is observed more as an emotional state (most obvious in children) while, Logos is like when older children and adults assume roles from the outside world which are systematic and reasoned. For Plato, mental functioning is no longer identified with the organic and the mythic – the senses, with action, with poeticized accounts of reality. Rather it resides in our ability to step back from the purely sensory. The artistic, the poetic, and the mythic, he claims, deal not with the truthful eternal nature of things, but rather with their phenomenal appearance. The mind hence is completely stripped of its mythos roots.

4. What is Labouvie-Vief's criticism of Platonic thought and how does she see wisdom as "integrated thought"? Specifically, how does she use evidence from developmental psychology to support her position?

Labouvie-Vief's criticism of Platonic thought, as it pertains to wisdom, is based in Plato's dualism. Plato's view of disembodiment ignores some of Labouvie-Vief's fundamental attributes of wisdom for example; Platonic thought would place little importance upon subjective and psychological dimensions of life. Plato made the assumption that a person can think independently of the influence of their own subjective experience. Plato’s separation of mythos and logos and overall denial of the importance of mythos denies the roots of the human experience. This mechanization of thought to the extent that there can be thought without thinkers was viewed as a fundamental flaw. While Piaget (formal cognitive developmental theorist) acknowledged that mythos is the root from which logos is formed, Piaget like Plato devalues mythos in later forms of development. On the other hand, Perry (post formal cognitive development) explained the shift to logos as a lack of development of meta-language to connect logos and mythos, suggesting that intelligence and wisdom are associated with the mature reconnection or development of logos and mythos used interdependently. According to Labouvie-Vief, “the mature individual, in turn, realizes that the subjective and communal are a necessary part of one’s endeavors to be objective” (72). (Kelsey Chartrand)

Jan 27: Greek/Hellenistic Wisdom 2

1. What is Aristotle's view of the end or telos toward which humans are directed and the function of human being? How are these related?

2. What is virtue for Aristotle? How does his view of virtue help make our function known?

3. What is the role of habituation in Aristotle's theory of virtue? Is this sort of self-training possible or desirable? Aristotle’s theory of virtue states that if you practice virtue you will be virtuous. Therefore, if you practice being virtuous you will become virtuous. Unless you make an effort to be virtuous you will not succeed. You must motivate yourself and make a habit of being virtuous. It is something that must be self taught and is not known strait from birth. This sort of self-training is possible if there is motivation to become virtuous. This type of training is desirable because no one can tell someone else to be virtuous the individual must decide for themselves that they indeed want to be virtuous.

3. What is the difference between calling something "adaptive" and calling it an "adaptation"?

4. What is a meme?

5. How does Csiksentmihalyi see wisdom as a cognitive process, a virtue, and as a personal good?