THE HISTORICAL DIALOGUE OF KNOWLEDGE AND WISDOM AND

CONTEMPORARY NEED FOR A “SOPHIALOGICAL” EPISTEMOLOGY

Dr. Cafer S. Yaran

            Introduction: Knowledge and Wisdom. Epistemology and “Sophialogy”

            Both knowledge and wisdom have many definitions and it is difficult to give a commonly accepted definition for them. Generally speaking, while knowledge is a intellectual product of the mental activity of human beings concerning mainly the true description of the related objects or states of affairs, wisdom is an intellectual, emotional, volitional and spiritual characteristics of some human beings in relation not only to the true knowledge of the objects but also to the true knowledge of the self, and to the valuable words and virtuous actions.

            Knowledge has been a branch of philosophy since the 17th century; and epistemology deals with such issues as the nature and derivation of knowledge, the scope of knowledge, and the reliability of claims to knowledge. But, unfortunately, wisdom has still not been as lucky as knowledge to be an independent discipline of philosophy and so to be discussed by many systematically, philosophically and permanently. For us, it is time for the development the “theory of wisdom,” better to say, “Sophialogy”.

            1. The Dialogue of Knowledge and Wisdom in Ancient and Mediaeval Times

            a. Knowledge and Wisdom in the Abrahamic Religions and Ancient Philosophy: When looked at to the relationship between knowledge and wisdom from the historical perspective, it is seen that they are accompanying concepts and in a complementary and productive dialogue. There are lots of verses in the Bible and the Qur’an concerning knowledge and wisdom, and some of them are stated together. This shows that they are neither identical nor unconnected concepts. These verses emphasize and encourage both the relationship between them and their relationship with virtue, happiness, and eschatological reward.

            There is also a close relationship between knowledge and wisdom in Antique philosophy. As everybody knows, the etymological meaning of the word of philosophy is the love of wisdom. Socrates conceives the love of wisdom as the pursuit of self-knowledge. He locates the intersection of things, human, and divine in the task of self-knowledge. For Plato, wisdom is the highest phase of four cardinal virtues, for it inspires and regulates the whole inner life. Aristotle drew a sharp distinction between practical wisdom and speculative wisdom, which is wisdom par excellence. The productive dialogue of knowledge and wisdom kept on going later Hellenistic philosophers, Neo-Platonists, and early Christian thinkers.

            b. Knowledge and Wisdom in Medieval Times, Particularly in Islam: According to a widespread conviction among the Muslims “there have been many expositions on the nature of knowledge in Islam more than in any other religion, culture and civilization, and this is due to the preeminent position and paramount role accorded to al-‘ilm by God in the Holy Qur’an.” Islamic epistemology “employs all the sources of knowledge –reason, sense-experience and intuition – to arrive at the knowledge of truth, and integrates the relative truth supplied by them with the absolute truth revealed by God.”

            The Qur’an “seldom speaks of kitab (knowledge) alone, but pairs this with hikmah (wisdom). Wisdom makes us realize the rationale, value and importance of this knowledge for ordering our life, individual and collective, in accordance with it. In Islam “Every wisdom is at the same time knowledge, but every knowledge is not wisdom. This gives knowledge an edge over wisdom, but it is wisdom, not mere knowledge, which has sole value in the eyes of God. ‘Whosoever is given wisdom, is given abundant good,’ [2:269] says the Qur’an.”

            2. Breaking of the Dialogue of Knowledge and Wisdom in Modern Times

The dialogue of knowledge and wisdom has broken off in modern times both in the Western world and in the Islamic world. But their preferences have been different; one has preferred knowledge and neglected wisdom, and the other has done the reverse.

            a. Breaking off in the Western World for the Sake of Knowledge: Rationalism: As modern philosophy has developed since Descartes, the connection of knowledge to its accompanying concern with wisdom or self-knowledge has been set aside. Philosophy as the love of wisdom that considers the true to be the whole has been replaced by the pursuit of method and the truth of the part. In regard to the Socratic tradition of self-knowledge, philosophy has lost its way. The spirit of the modern age has been strictly rationalistic in the sense that it makes human reason the highest authority in the pursuit of knowledge, and naturalistic in that it seek to explain the inner and outer nature without supernatural presuppositions. At the end, knowledge without wisdom has made modern man spiritually homeless, alien to himself or herself, and has made the humanity and the earth challenged by many global cultural and environmental crises. Rationalist and positivist epistemology followed by an atheist and naturalist ontology and by relativist and nihilist ethic brought to modern world more knowledge but less wisdom, more power but less virtue, and more pleasure but less peace.

            b. Breaking off in the Islamic World for the Sake of Wisdom: mysticism: The contemporary philosopher of Descartes (1596-1650) in Islamic World is Mulla Sadra (1571-1640) and he made his preference from the side of wisdom rather than knowledge. Roughly after these dates, the dialogue and balance of knowledge and wisdom could not have been kept on in Islamic world as well. The spirit of the last centuries in Islamic world has been mainly mystical rather than rationalistic or balanced one, and many people have seen practical wisdom enough for living a good life. As Iqbal said, “The more genuine school of Sufism have, no doubt, done good work in shaping and directing the evolution of religious experience in Islam; but their latter-day representatives, owing to their ignorance of the modern mind, have become absolutely incapable of receiving any fresh inspiration from modern thought and experience.” At the end, wisdom without knowledge has made Muslim man materially homeless, scientifically and technologically backwards, and culturally fragile. Mystical and practical wisdom followed by an idealist ontology and universalist ethics brought to Muslim world more wisdom but less knowledge, more virtue but less power, and more internal peace but less international peace and prestige.

            Neither Western nor Islamic world, which brought off the dialogue of the accompanying and complementary concepts of knowledge and wisdom for three centuries, could not have escaped from various crises and could not have arrived at totally a more ideal situation. Muslim intellectuals (the modernists) became aware of the crisis in their world about 100 years ago; and Western intellectuals (the postmodernist) became aware of their crisis about 50 years ago. But the searches for solution do not give so much hope in either worlds; because the solutions are too simple, that is, to reject your past and offer the other extreme edge of the dichotomy: Forget knowledge, reason, rationality, truth, objectivity, science, universal values and virtues, and embrace their completely opposites, better to say, ‘anything goes.’ Or, forget wisdom, heart, spirituality, goodness, subjectivity, religion, traditional values and virtues, and embrace the opposites, better to say, just reason and science (see for example, Akarsu, 2002: 29).

            3. Contemporary Need for a “Sophialogical” Epistemology

            A better way of solution and of total development seems to be in the recovery of the dialogue of knowledge and wisdom. Wisdom should be an independent branch of philosophy (“Sophialogy”) and so should be studied in detail everywhere. As a part of this proposal, one can speak of “sophiological epistemology” (particularly in the context of the Western philosophy) and “epistemological sophiology” (particularly in the context of the Islamic philosophy and mysticism). We will deal just with the former here briefly.

            “Sophiological” epistemology is an epistemological approach looking at the philosophical problems concerning knowledge from the perspective of philosophical or global wisdom. For wisdom have a global essence common in the well-known traditions of philosophy and religion. We will be contented with mentioning only the two characteristics of this approach by setting out from the two statements on the Temple at Delphi, which is well known among the philosophers since the time of Socrates:

            a. “Know Thyself”: The Dimension of Humanitarian and Ethical Depth in Knowledge: The central concern of all kinds of knowledge should be related to the self-knowledge, self-development and self-realization. Knowledge of the self or subjective knowledge should also be considered as a source and criteria of knowledge; and the development of the self (and of the human conditions in general) should be considered among the main aims of getting knowledge. There should be a close relationship between all kinds of knowledge and human discourse and action, and knowledge should have a quality of being a guide to life and of finding a meaning in life.

            b. “Nothing Too Much”: The Dimension of Pluralistic and Complementary Breadth in Knowledge: “Sophialogical” epistemology requires not being in extremist and exclusivist in one source or in one criteria of knowledge; by contrast, it requires a pluralistic, holistic and complementary perspective in all the epistemological problems. This point is valid both in the problems of empiricism, rationalism and mysticism, and also in the problems of objectivity and subjectivity, etc.

            As a result, first, the recovery of the old productive and constructive dialogue of knowledge and wisdom, secondly, making wisdom as an independent branch of philosophy as “sophialogy”, and finally, a contemporary approach of “sophialogical” epistemology may contribute to the solution of our personal, social and global problems no matter we live in the West or East. Only in such a case, we can say sincerely the two beautiful hope: Tomorrow there will be fewer things we don’t know; and tomorrow there will be less evil we couldn’t prevent.