Wisdom as Expert Knowledge System: A Critical Review of a Contemporary Operationalization of an Ancient Concept

Paul B. Baltes and his colleagues, who are among the most prominent contemporary wisdom researchers, define wisdom as ‘expert knowledge in the domain fundamental pragmatics of life.’ By contrast, this article argues that the definition, operationalization, and measurement of wisdom should not be reduced to expertise and that the term wisdom should be reserved for wise persons rather than expert knowledge. In fact, evidence from their research confirms that Baltes et al. primarily assess expert or intellectual knowledge in the wisdom domain ‘fundamental pragmatics of life’ rather than how wise people are. As an alternative, a model of wisdom is presented that defines, operationalizes, and measures wisdom as an integration of cognitive, reflective, and affective personality characteristics. During the last two decades, researchers in the behavioral sciences have shown renewed interest in the ancient concept of wisdom [Chinen, 1984; Clayton & Birren, 1980; Dittmann-Kohli & Baltes, 1990; Sternberg, 1990b], which has historically been considered the pinnacle of human development [Baltes & Staudinger, 2000]. A possible reason for this resurrection is a new emphasis on positive psychology [Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000]. Wise people presumably possess many positive qualities, such as a mature and integrated personality, superior judgment skills in difficult life matters, and the ability to cope with the vicissitudes of life [Assmann, 1994; Bianchi, 1994; Clayton, 1982; Dittmann-Kohli & Baltes, 1990; Kekes, 1983, 1995; Kramer, 2000; Sternberg, 1990b, 1998; Vaillant, 1993]. Copyright © 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel