The Missing Links: Comments on “The Science of Wisdom in a Polarized World”

Excerpt: With regard to (1) balance of viewpoints, I stated in my 1998 definition of wisdom that wisdom is sought through a balance of (a) intrapersonal, (b) interpersonal, and (c) extrapersonal interests” (Sternberg, 1998, p. 347). With regard to (2) epistemic humility, I have stated that lack of wisdom—foolishness–occurs when people commit the “the omniscience fallacy, [which] occurs when people think that they know everything, and lose sight of the limitations of their own knowledge” (Sternberg, 2019a, p. 7; see also Sternberg, 2002). With regard to (3) context adaptability, I further defined wisdom in the 1998 definition in terms of “(a) adaptation to existing environments, (b) shaping of existing environments, and (c) selection of new environments” (Sternberg, 1998, p. 347). And with regard to (4) multiple perspectives, I said in 1998 that wisdom I achieved “through a balance among multiple…interests” (Sternberg, 1998, p. 7; see also Sternberg, 2001, 2019c), which themselves are a consequence of multiple perspectives.

Because the common wisdom model is an amalgamation of many perspectives, I suspect many other wisdom researchers also will be pleased with the model, as it encompasses a fairly wide range of theories, although by no means all of them. For example, there is overlap, I believe, with the MORE model (Glueck & Bluck, 2013) and with the Ardelt (1997) model. I am pleased to see the convergence of the common model with my own balance theory and with other theories, suggesting that multiple accounts of wisdom are converging upon a single phenomenon...

Read the article: Sternberg, R. J. (2020). The Missing Links: Comments on “The Science of Wisdom in a Polarized World”. Psychological Inquiry, 31(2), 153-159.