One of the differences between a clever or an intelligent person and between a wise person is that if you explain things one by one, step after step, logically, to an intelligent person - he might understand what you are saying. A wise person might understand without explanations. - One other thing is that a wise person might not be so interested in attempting to tell or explain what is the difference between wisdom and being clever. He knows what these things are, - it is not necessarily so interesting to put things in words or to create definitions. - An intelligent person who has not come to wisdom might wonder what actually the difference is.
- Clearly a wise person knows what being intelligent is, you might say perhaps that every child does, - but an intelligent person does not necessarily know what wisdom is. I don’t know if it ought to be viewed as a surprise - but in practice you might find very intelligent people imagining their cleverness to imply or be the phenomenon of wisdom.
Obviously an intelligent person would excel at things like exact science, but a wise one would not normally necessarily find interest in such a field. - Clearly it is not that easy to just give a simple definition of what these two are, - or anyway clarify the issue for all those who are concerned or interested, - (plus) particularly perhaps while there is another third layer, in between the two, which in English it seems would only be referred to as intelligence as well. - In Hebrew we have another word for it, - but it does not mean everyone are aware of what exactly the meaning is.
- Relating to computers it might be easy to refer: - Wisdom it seems would be a quality of the “main” of a program, intelligence would rather be a quality of some particular procedure (or of some particular procedures) not running in real time and of a rather low rank in the hirarchy within the program.
- Inteligence can be easily examined, logical structures can be obviously verified step by step, - also tests can be held to examine or tell how skilled a person is - while the results can even be told by a computer, - this isn’t any news. - But one can not have a computerized test to measure wisdom. There is no such thing. - It is different. But it is today to a great extent a forgoten thing. - Because silly intellectuals are much blind to it, - otherwise they wouldn’t be what they are - intellectuals; - being [an] intellectual is much like being stupid, - but today there are not even many to whom there may be a point in saying this. - And also because [as I said] one can not run a computerized test to measure it, - to measure wisdom. If one does have it than one can see it in others. Not necessarily always, but still clearly as a general rule. - Sometimes one who doesn’t have it that much would still be able to see it too. - Sometimes it can be concluded. And various levels of it could be seen as different things. - So when one talks of wisdom, - even if one is referring to a real thing, - in another way he might still not really know what the thing is.
So far. - For now, that is.
- Clearly a wise person knows what being intelligent is, you might say perhaps that every child does, - but an intelligent person does not necessarily know what wisdom is. I don’t know if it ought to be viewed as a surprise - but in practice you might find very intelligent people imagining their cleverness to imply or be the phenomenon of wisdom.
Obviously an intelligent person would excel at things like exact science, but a wise one would not normally necessarily find interest in such a field. - Clearly it is not that easy to just give a simple definition of what these two are, - or anyway clarify the issue for all those who are concerned or interested, - (plus) particularly perhaps while there is another third layer, in between the two, which in English it seems would only be referred to as intelligence as well. - In Hebrew we have another word for it, - but it does not mean everyone are aware of what exactly the meaning is.
- Relating to computers it might be easy to refer: - Wisdom it seems would be a quality of the “main” of a program, intelligence would rather be a quality of some particular procedure (or of some particular procedures) not running in real time and of a rather low rank in the hirarchy within the program.
- Inteligence can be easily examined, logical structures can be obviously verified step by step, - also tests can be held to examine or tell how skilled a person is - while the results can even be told by a computer, - this isn’t any news. - But one can not have a computerized test to measure wisdom. There is no such thing. - It is different. But it is today to a great extent a forgoten thing. - Because silly intellectuals are much blind to it, - otherwise they wouldn’t be what they are - intellectuals; - being [an] intellectual is much like being stupid, - but today there are not even many to whom there may be a point in saying this. - And also because [as I said] one can not run a computerized test to measure it, - to measure wisdom. If one does have it than one can see it in others. Not necessarily always, but still clearly as a general rule. - Sometimes one who doesn’t have it that much would still be able to see it too. - Sometimes it can be concluded. And various levels of it could be seen as different things. - So when one talks of wisdom, - even if one is referring to a real thing, - in another way he might still not really know what the thing is.
So far. - For now, that is.
