theorywatch

I’m curious as to why such clever folks as these at the University of Chicago would think that people whose primary qualification is that of having gotten their doctorate within the past 10 years would be better able to define wisdom than any other group. In fact, the lure of funding makes it highly unlikely that significant results would come from this effort, I’m afraid, as the people who really are immersed in these issues generally aren’t experienced proposal writers. I enjoy thinking about this project, but I suspect that my idea of how to define “wisdom” — let’s assemble a matched volunteer group of retired librarians (as competent representatives of “book knowledge”) and retired nurses (as competent representatives of “life knowledge’), give them lunch, and see how their definitions converge and diverge — isn’t nearly scientific or sexy enough for this $2 million dollar endeavor.

I’d like to give my group members the money for their favorite causes, though, and see how their definitions compare with their donations.

Hmm, maybe I should give it a try!