Knowledge to Wisdom: We Need a Revolution

Introduction The following document is a very brief summary of a thesis and argument that I have devoted the last 30 years of my life to trying to get across to my fellow human beings. It was first spelled out in What’s Wrong With Science? (Bran’s Head Books, 1976) and subsequently in From Knowledge to Wisdom (Blackwell, 1984), Is Science Neurotic? (Imperial College Press, 2004) and numerous articles, references to which can be found on . Three years ago an international group was formed, called Friends of Wisdom, which seeks to get across to academics and the public the compelling arguments and urgent need to transform academic inquiry so that its basic aim becomes to seek and promote wisdom. The document below is taken from the website of Friends of Wisdom, the URL of which is . It is the mission statement of Friends of Wisdom. You are invited to join.     

The continuing need for disinterested research

For scientific knowledge to be trustworthy, it needs to be dissociated from material interests. Disinterested research also performs other important non-instrumental roles. In particular, academic science has traditionally provided society with reliable, imaginative public knowledge and independent, self-critical expertise. But this type of science is not compatible with the practice of instrumental research, which is typically proprietary, prosaic, pragmatic and partisan. With ever-increasing dependence on commercial or state funding, all modes of knowledge production are merging into a new, ‘post-academic’ research culture which is dominated by utilitarian goals. Growing concern about conflicts of interest is thus a symptom of deep-seated malaise in science and medicine. An expanded version of this paper was presented at an International Conference on “Conflict of Interest and its Significance in Science and Medicine” held in Warsaw, Poland on 5–6 April, 2002.     

Wisdom and Knowledge: The Outline of Eastern and Western Aesthetic Spirits?

Wisdom and knowledge are the basic spirits of Eastern and Western aesthetics. The shortcoming of the aesthetics based on knowledge, i.e., the aesthetics of knowledge, lies in the fact that it clings to the opposing differences between Western- and Eastern-centered theories. These differences include essentialism and anti-essentialism; harmonious and non-harmonious relationships between person, self, nature and society; art or nature as the highest aesthetic realm; metaphysics or psychology as the aesthetic domain; dualism and Advaita; and so on. The aesthetics based on wisdom, namely aesthetics of wisdom, is valuable due to its adopting an impartial attitude toward Eastern and Western aesthetics, essentialism and anti-essentialism, philosophical horizon and psychological horizon, theory of harmony and theory of antagonism, beauty of art and beauty of nature, dualism and Advaita, up to aesthetics of knowledge and aesthetics of wisdom. Contrasted with this understanding of the aesthetics of knowledge, non-dualism and non-Advaita are the soul of the spirit of the aesthetics of wisdom.     

Is Science Neurotic?

Neurosis can be interpreted as a methodological condition from which any aim-pursuing entity can suffer. If such an entity pursues a problematic aim B but represents to itself that it is pursuing a different aim C and, as a result, fails to solve the problems associated with B which, if solved, would lead to the pursuit of aim A, then the entity may be said to be \"rationalistically neurotic.\" Natural science is neurotic in this sense insofar as its basic aim is represented as improving knowledge of factual truth as such (aim C), when actually the aim of science is to improve knowledge of explanatory truth (aim B). Science itself does not suffer significantly from this neurosis, but philosophy of science does. Much more serious is the rationalistic neurosis of the social sciences and academic inquiry more generally. freeing social science and academic inquiry from neurosis would have far-reaching beneficial, intellectual, institutional and cultural consequences.     

"RATIONALITY" IN SCIENCE AND MORALS

Abstract. Martin Eger's comparison of controversies in science and morals is extended to a consideration of the nature of "rationality" in each. Both theoretical science and moral philosophy are held to be relativist in social and historical terms, but science also has definitive non-relativist pragmatic criteria of truth. The problem for moral philosophy is to delineate its own appropriate types of social criteria of validity.     

苏格拉底真的认为"美德即知识"吗?

根据史料,我们并不能确认苏格拉底真的认为美德即知识,而“美德即知识”在苏格拉底时代是一个比较含混的命题,并没有准确表达苏格拉底关于美德和知识关系的看法。     

Why Do Theologians Need to be Scientists?

The postmodern situation has given rise to a quest for new understandings of the relationship between theology and science. Drawing illustrative material from an episode of Star Trek: Voyager, I look at three paradigmatic answers to the questionn posed in the title—th modern empirical scientific, the renewed medieval, and the post-modern—with the goal of outlining a methodological approach for an engagement between Christian theology and sciencein the post-modern context. Drawing insight from post-empirical philosophy of science and the sociology of knowledge, I argue that both science and theology engage in the task of constructing a world for human habitation.     

制造疾病：工具理性的泛滥

工具理性的泛滥导致医疗的商品化和技术主体化,产生“制造疾病”的现象层出不穷。究其原因概括为：其一,求“效率”过程无意中“制造疾病”;其二,为追求利益最大化有意“制造疾病”,将科学简单地等同于数据,认为科学可以解释一切疾病,无视患者自愈的能力,将“正常”的生命现象视为疾病;其三,视人为物,为社会管理“制造疾病”。医者应将自己的工具理性,约束在为患者谋利的价值理性之下,弘扬医学人文去遏制制造疾病的恶行。

     

必须关注防止医学领域内的唯心科学观

对医学科学领域内存在的和某些一度充斥的唯心科学观的社会表现进行分析,从过程管理和科学方法论的重要性入手,提出防范学术腐败和发展医学科学的方法和措施,从教育和民生的角度探讨医务工作者和社会学家必须关注的医学领域内的唯心科学观,并举例说明医学工作者的科学道德自律和社会责任感的重要性。     

God in the Hands of Future Science

There is reasonable evidence suggesting that humans have an innate tendency toward being religious. Consequently, religion is unlikely to disappear; the question then is how this feature will impact on future society. Three scenarios are discussed: One, science will dominate; two, religion will dominate; and three, the present conflict between the two is resolved. The latter scenario may happen through a realization that religion has the potential for doing more good than bad, in terms of individual quality of life and in improving society. Obtaining maximum benefit of religion will require a concept of God that is compatible with science, and that can be accepted as a common core for the various faiths. Science may help in this endeavor.     

科学探究的认知机制研究述评

科学探究涉及一个复杂的认知过程,Klahr和Dunbar的SDDS模型、Kuhn的模型以及双过程模型对此过程进行了描述;另外研究者们还对科学探究过程不同阶段需要的认知技能和认知策略以及影响因素进行了研究。     

REFLECTIONS: EDUCATION AND OUR SHARED FUTURE

Based on a comparative study, this paper highlights and analyses commonalities and differences between an Oriental systems approach, WSR, and two Western counterparts, TOP and MMD. It is suggested that cultural differences among systems approaches might probably have been overshadowed by both commonalities between Western and Eastern traditions and differences within the same cultural tradition. It will be further proposed that by being more consciously open to and learning from each other, systems approaches in the East and the West may have more to offer for dealing with the complexity which confronts humankind.     

The Value of Knowledge/Rationality or the Knowledge/Rationality of Value?: Implications for Education

This paper reviews and augments important work in philosophy of education on intrinsic aims for education, of knowledge, of knowledge of values, and of rationality. A contemporary conception of knowledge as ``rationality's `data-base' is proposed and an in-depth section on the intrinsic value of rationality is incorporated.