#top
VIEWPOINT
Age of Wisdom
*
"Opinions are a dime a dozen,"
they say. Whoever they are. And I'm sure they
ought to know.
So I figure that
if a dozen opinions are worth a dime, mine should be
worth about a nickel anyway. And I've got a bunch of
opinions, and on some subjects I've got several on each
side. So all toll, I should think mine are worth a pretty
penny.
Another thing they
say, is that, "Wisdom comes with age."
Well, I dispute
that statement. And as evidence of my position, I present
myself. And here I must qualify my statement. If, by
Wisdom, experience is meant, that could very well be so.
However, I know some (many in fact) people who are no
more experienced in old age than they were when they were
young. The usual causes were: either they were too
fearful to try something new because they might make a
mistake (and of course they would), or because they might
look foolish in the eyes of someone (and of course they
would).
How be it, if
they mean Wisdom that comes as a result of
making mistakes, and having failures and successes, this
I dispute.
Of course, this
last group of people will have a great deal more to share
than the former group. But the knowledge gained is not necessarily
of any use to the person who acquired it. Though it may
be to some intelligent youth who uses that knowledge to
limit his or her own mistakes and failures.
Before offering
myself as evidence, I first present King David, and his
son, Solomon of the Bible. These two, I think most people
would allow, are considered among the Wisest of the Wise.
And their writings have inspired and helped an
unimaginable number of people for thousands of years.
David acquired
his knowledge and wisdom from experience. He worked hard
and suffered much to gain it.
Solomon, on the
other hand, did not have to lift a finger, as far as we
know, to acquire his. It was handed to him "on a
silver platter" so to speak.
David, through
mighty deeds, created a great nation, but through
treachery and other abuses contrary to his own writings,
he mangled his own life along with that of his family.
Afterwards,
Solomon took that great nation and through selfish
desires set the stage for that great nation's
destruction. Meanwhile, his own life departed farther
astray of his own wisdom the older he became.
As a final blow,
the son (and grandson) of these two Wise men apparently
learned nothing from either of their mistakes and
training, and drove the final wedge that separated that
great kingdom.
Some readers
will undoubtedly say, "Why is he talking about
wisdom, and what's that got to do with opinion?" An
excellent question, and unfortunately, one has very little
to do with the other.
But, it should,
which is exactly my point.
There's an
interesting 'catch-22' that applies here;
IF WISDOM WERE
INVOLVED WITH OPINION, THERE WOULDN'T BE VERY MANY
OPINIONS, Would there?
Earlier I said I
would offer myself as sacrifice to help prove my point
that age does not necessarily mean wisdom.
I will begin
with the here and now, that is the point on which all of
us stand at this moment. And please indulge me, my
apparent ramblings will eventually connect together to
one degree or another.
At any point in
our life, we see where we are, and where we have been. We
do not see where we are going, but only our hope
(or fear) of the future.
But, we know
where we are. We think!
Yet, in the
future, we will look back and see that we were nowhere
near where we thought we were at the time. That is, those
who dare to be moving at all. And the farther in the
future we look back, the farther afield we appear.
To add to this
discrepancy, our view of the past is fogged and distorted
by excuses and justifications of our self and our
attitudes. That is, all but those we have, hopefully,
matured beyond.
It's far easier
to say, "This is what I used to do, and
this is what I've learned from it, so therefore
you should listen to me because of the wisdom I've
gained"; then the alternative which is (if
confronted with that flaw you try so hard to conceal),
"Ok, so I do such-and-such. But just you do what I say,
and not as I do."
Many, Many years
ago (half a lifetime, in fact), I spent years in therapy.
Part of this
therapy was what is called "group therapy."
This consisted of anywhere from five to fifty men, along
with one psychologist.
For years I had
the opportunity to listen to, and take part in, these
sessions where each person was expected to examine
himself and 'Spill his guts' to the group.
Now, you would
think that anyone participating in such a group would do
all they could to take advantage of the opportunity to
better himself, wouldn't you? And, you would probably
think that the psychologist was a person beyond the
weakness of his patients, now wouldn't you?
Instead it was a
game not far different than what kinder gardeners play.
That game consisted of one person talking, and the others
tearing him apart. And what the other patients missed,
the Doctor would catch.
Of course, this
made it easy for everyone to tell stories that they hoped
would ease them through each session. The result of
which, of course, nothing was gained except another lie
and deep-seated problem reinforced.
Another aspect
of the game was for each man to watch the others closely
to see what won over the Doctor (and if there happened to
be a woman there, the game became even more serious). If
one person seemed to be doing well in the sessions,
others would try to mimic him and finagle his tricks from
him so they could look good too.
It reminded me
of students trying to find out who had the best
cheat-sheets. Learning wasn't important, it was the appearance
of learning that mattered.
Another thing
that I observed was that the doctors (and there were many
of them) would nod and sit proudly on their throne,
saying to himself, (and doubtless to each other),
"That's true of them." It was as
though the fact that they had all that "book
la'rnin'" they were different from other
people.
Now for me. I'm
sitting here so high-and-mighty judging everyone else.
How was I different?
I was
different, in two ways. The first is that my problems
were much more intense than most of the others, maybe
even all the others, by some accounts at least.
And the second
way is, I knew I had many problems and was
determined to work through them as best I could.
That meant no
games. It also meant no recognition for any progress, in
fact quite the contrary because the doctors only
recognized the game, not what was real. For one thing,
not playing the game meant that their egos weren't being
massaged, and they couldn't handle that.
But in all
fairness, there were no instructions on not
playing the game, so the doctors had no established way
to deal with my situation.
And, of course,
neither did I have any instructions. So I made plenty of
mistakes that could be, and were, quickly and readily
pointed out.
As I sat in the
groups, I found myself saying, "Yes, that's true of me."
So I got to learn a lot about me. Of course I didn't
talk in groups, or to the doctors, but I learned a lot.
Incidentally, I
must confess, that in the beginning I was one of, if not
the most, fatheaded and boisterous of the group,
attacking every word anyone said. That is something I
wish I could look back on and say it used to be.
Over the years I've gotten better, but if I had actually
outgrown it, I wouldn't be writing this book, would I?
But I learned.
And the most important thing that I learned is: I am
like everyone else! I don't mean that I do
everything that others do, but in one way or another,
that problem that is in them, is in me. It may come out
in another form, and it may be in a larger or smaller
proportions than someone else's. But it's there.
And the more I
try to deny it, the more rooted it is in my ego.
With this piece
of knowledge --and confession, I was able to put other
wisdoms to work,
The first is, I
can not see, (therefore can not admit) my own faults
until I get past them. As I stated earlier, I
either see them as foggy justifications for which I still
make excuses, or they are so much a part of me that I
think that they are ok. I might not think they are ok for
others, but for me it's different.
I'm sure you've
spotted the fallacy of my thinking there.
But if I can't
see them, or are still justifying them --how can I
possibly get passed them?
First of all,
when I find myself judging or criticizing someone, even
if it's only in my mind, I turn it around and say;
"Ok, how do I do the same thing?" If I
can't come up with an answer, than I know my problem is
bigger than I am able to admit.
Big problems
have to be tackled in chunks. You can't swallow a whole
watermelon. Nor should you try. But cut it in pieces and
eventually, over time, you can digest the entire thing
without doing yourself harm.
"How do I
do the same thing?" was the question. I look for
some small way that I do the same thing, that I can admit
to myself, and work at conquering it. I also watch others
and see how they apparently have learned to
handle a similar problem. It doesn't matter if they
really have or not; But it's a starting point for me, and
a direction to take in my own quest. I will learn new
approaches to the problem as I journey forward.
Some
"problems" that I wish to divest myself of, I
find just aren't worth the effort. They are me.
Things like: I see people who are quiet spoken, calm
under pressure, and in what appears to be total control
of themselves. I envy that.
And I've tried
to emulate it. Many times.
Yet, when I am
in a conversation, as I look back on it, I was highly
intense, my arms waving in the air, red in the face, and
did anywhere from 50-99% of the talking.
And the times I
catch myself doing otherwise--that is, being like I think
I should be, I feel phony, and that I am
cheating the other person out of being with who they think
they are with. Of course, they may prefer the
phony person, and very likely do.
Is there a point
to all of this? Yes, that point is: just because someone
can quote beautiful words, does not mean that they have
any understanding of them.
One example of
this is; a student once said that he was studying
Einstein's theory. When asked if the student understood
the theory, he said that he did.
And this is the
fallacy in many people's thinking. They believe that
because they know about a thing, that they know
the thing.
Knowledge is
just a bud, a flower in infancy. If not nurtured, it will
dry up and wither. If pruned and trimmed properly, it
will bloom. And once it has reached full maturity, it
dies.
Knowledge should
be kept in its budding stage -- ever growing and reaching
for the flower stage, but never attaining the point where
it appears beautiful, but is in reality only preparing to
scatter its seeds and die.
Take those seeds
of knowledge, and plant them. But remember, they are only
seeds. Treat them as such.
When the world
was flat and the center of the universe, everyone knew
where their boundaries were. Now that it is round and
zooms its way through an ever-expanding infinity, we
sense a loss of limits to knowledge.
Avoid advise
from anyone who has reached perfect wisdom. They stand on
a flat earth with walls of their own making blocking
their way to true Wisdom that can never be reached by
mortal Man.
If you treat all
knowledge as opinion, rather than fact, than you will
have no trouble questioning it.
But if it is
fact in your mind, than it cannot be changed -- and won't
be, by you. But tomorrow someone will have proven you the
fool for having believed it as fact.
Do you disagree
with my opinions? You are not alone. In fact there is a
good possibility that I will disagree with some
of them before they are even in print.
So finally, yes
there is a finally, Listen to the Wisdom of
others, Hear their opinions. Glean them for what applies
to you.
Just don't
expect to see that same wisdom applied in their own life.
If you are ever
in doubt about what I have just said, remember David and
Solomon.
And if you are really
desperate for more reason, consider what I said about me.
And a final
finally, take every opinion with a grain of salt;
Especially mine.
Tumbleweed
|