This post is Part 2 of a series.

In a post from a few months back, I discussed wisdom as a concept. While we all have an idea of what "wisdom" is, consistency in that understanding is debatable. I addressed a wide array of research on wisdom, and at the end, we were still left with ambiguity. In my conclusion, I admitted that our exploration of the topic may not have adequately answered many questions about what wisdom really is, but made the point that, whatever it is, it probably cannot exist without the ability to think critically. However, despite failing to pin down anything "concrete," consideration of ideas presented in that discussion does facilitate identification of some "broader strokes," thematically speaking, of what we mean when we talk about wisdom.

This is a rather straightforward point because, simply, if wisdom were domain-specific (as opposed to domain-general), it would mean that people would only be "wise" about certain topics, subjects, or domains. The "problem" with that is we already have a name for it: expertise. With that, wisdom and expertise are not the same (i.e., for reasons discussed below). Thus, I would classify wisdom as domain-general in that one who is wise can apply it to most, if not all, walks of life.

Consistent with much of the research on wisdom (as referenced in my previous piece), I would further classify........

© Psychology Today