Wisdom as Expert Knowledge System: A Critical Review of a Contemporary Operationalization of an Ancient Concept

Abstract

Paul B. Baltes and his colleagues, who are among the most prominent contemporary wisdom researchers, define wisdom as ‘expert knowledge in the domain fundamental pragmatics of life.’ By contrast, this article argues that the definition, operationalization, and measurement of wisdom should not be reduced to expertise and that the term wisdom should be reserved for wise persons rather than expert knowledge. In fact, evidence from their research confirms that Baltes et al. primarily assess expert or intellectual knowledge in the wisdom domain ‘fundamental pragmatics of life’ rather than how wise people are. As an alternative, a model of wisdom is presented that defines, operationalizes, and measures wisdom as an integration of cognitive, reflective, and affective personality characteristics.

Wisdom across the ages and its modern day relevance

“…As a result, the definition may fail to encompass constructs such as those reflective and affective qualities that represent the more virtuous basis of the "personality" of a wise person (Ardelt, 2004). Sternberg (1998) also offers an explicit definition of wisdom, referred to as the balance theory of wisdom.…”

Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier

“…Although the Berlin wisdom paradigm figures largely in the field of wisdom research, some questions remain open in this theory (see also Ardelt, 2004). First, thus far the nature of the investigations has been cross-sectional, whereas with respect to wisdom, period and cohort effects cannot be ruled out.…”

A Polish adaptation of Monika Ardelt’s Three-Dimensional Wisdom Scale (3D-WS)

“…The first one focuses on definitions in which wisdom is considered as a specific configuration of particular personality traits and personal competencies (see Clayton & Birren, 1980;Ardelt, 1997Ardelt, , 2000aArdelt, , 2000bArdelt, , 2003Ardelt, , 2004Ardelt, , 2010Ardelt, , 2011b. The second approach comprises definitions explaining wisdom as one of the positive results of a person's development (see Erikson, 1982;Arlin, 1990;Kramer, 1990Kramer, , 2000Labouvie-Vief, 1990Orwoll, & Perlmutter, 1990).…”

“…The second approach comprises definitions explaining wisdom as one of the positive results of a person's development (see Erikson, 1982;Arlin, 1990;Kramer, 1990Kramer, , 2000Labouvie-Vief, 1990Orwoll, & Perlmutter, 1990). Representatives of the third approach define wisdom in terms of a complex system of practical knowledge (Baltes, Dittmann-Kohli, & Dixon, 1984;Baltes & Smith, 1990;Baltes & Staudinger, 1993Staudinger, 1999;Baltes & Kunzmann, 2003, 2004. Finally, the fourth approach encompasses those definitions in which wisdom is understood as a process manifesting itself in everyday life (see Sternberg, 1998Sternberg, , 2003Sternberg, , 2007Yang, 2001Yang, , 2011Yang, , 2013.…”