Beyond Intelligences and Syntheses: Some Initial Thoughts about Wisdom
© Howard Gardner 2024
In scholarship—as in other spheres—one thing often leads to another. By a path I might not have anticipated, as I find myself clearly launched in my ninth decade, I have been pondering what it means to be wise.
Here’s the unexpected sequence:
My challenge to a unitary, singular psychological concept of “mind” led to the theory of multiple intelligences (MI theory), along with the scholarly book that has long been my major “claim to fame,” Frames of Mind (1983).
My writings about intelligence led to questions about creativity—and eventually to seven case studies, each putatively related to one of the intelligences, in Creating Minds (1993).
On the heels of studying creativity, an invitation to write about leadership stimulated a comparable examination of several Leading Minds (1995). And indeed, I eventually came to see creativity as a form of “indirect” leadership.
Questions about the constructive (as contrasted with destructive) manifestations of intelligences, creativity, leadership prompted me to ponder the realm of morality and ethics—and to a fruitful collaboration on Good Work (2001); the launching and pursuit of The Good Work Project (now the Good Project); and to philosophical reflections about Truth, Beauty, and Goodness Reframed (2011).
When (as I neared my ninth decade) I undertook a scholarly autobiography, I realized that my own mind could not be described in an illuminating way by “MI theory.” Rather, I was—and am—better described as having A Synthesizing Mind (2020).
And then—a complete surprise!—I became (and remain!) obsessed with the nature and components of synthesizing: both because synthesizing turns out to be a credible description of my own talents—such as they are; and because the nature and nurture of the human synthesizing competence has been largely neglected by psychologists and other cognitively-oriented scholars. Hence, in the past several years, I have written and posted dozens of essays about synthesizing—most of them posted on this site.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Gradually, I came to realize that as with intelligences, creativity, and leadership, such integrative capacities are essentially amoral—one can deploy each and all of these capacities for neutral, benign, or malignant purposes. Both propagandist Joseph Goebbels and literary giant Johann Wolfgang von Goethe were masters of the German language; political leaders Nelson Mandela and Slobodan Milosevic each manifested considerable interpersonal intelligence. But as suggested by these contrasting cases, comparable talents can be mobilized for quite different ends.
No surprise that synthesizing can also be mobilized in different ways for disparate purposes. According to psychoanalyst Erik Erikson, Mahatma Gandhi analyzed the psyche of the Indian populace and thereupon devised his vision and his methods of peaceful resistance; and so has current leader Narendra Modi, who indeed himself seeks to replace Gandhi in the pantheon of esteemed Indian leaders of the last century.
I’ve quipped that less positive uses ought to be labelled as SINtheses. I can’t help quipping further that Donald Trump has identified several of the less appealing contemporary American attitudes and aspirations and has produced an effective SINthesis. Though they’re unlikely to be reading these words, supporters of President Trump could claim that his synthesis is brilliant, timely, needed, and morally justifiable.
Which, by a circuitous route, brings me to the topic of this blog.
Wisdom: First Thoughts
A Preliminary Definition
Wisdom is a form of synthesis that extends over time—building on the past, analyzing the present, anticipating (and perhaps trying to affect) the future. Wisdom embeds and foregrounds specific moral and ethical values, seeking to embody and extend those values…while sloughing off or minimizing competing ones. Wisdom is modest (not claiming omniscience); tentative (not claiming longevity); but it can be and sometimes is courageous—wise individuals are prepared to stand their ground and poised to deal with criticism. While neither restricted to nor guaranteed by age, wisdom is more likely to emerge as a result of a lifetime of observation, learning, and reflection, rather than as a sudden flash of insight or insights.
An Intriguing Example (from recent American history)
After World War II, a small group of Americans played an inordinately significant role in the creation and execution of policy, particularly foreign policy. Coming largely from privileged backgrounds, highly educated, having lived through the Second World War (indeed spanning its antecedents as well as its sequelae), these persons generally shunned the limelight. And yet, while working behind the scenes, they were instrumental in making consequential decisions…and at least for the time, the decisions were often on target. (Among the more familiar names: Secretary of State Dean Acheson; scholar of Russia and the Soviet Union George Kennan; roving ambassadors Charles (Chip) Bohlen and Averill Harriman.)
In a timely and well-titled volume The Wise Men, (1986) journalists Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas documented the lives and the achievements of this remarkable group. And in an afterword, published in 2012, the authors speculate about why such a set of quiet but powerful “influencers” is unlikely to arise again. And, at least so far, the vastly different cultural, social, political, and epistemological milieu of the 21st century supports the authors’ speculations.
Over a decade before the publication of The Wise Men, journalist David Halberstam had published an equally timely and important book The Best and the Brightest (1972). In his account of the launch and pursuit of the ill-advised Vietnam War, Halberstam homes in on a somewhat younger group—in some cases, proteges of The Wise Men. In the early 1960s, upon the launch of the Kennedy administration, these policymakers (some from highly privileged backgrounds) had descended on Washington and soon launched and pursued the Vietnam war. Despite being deemed “the best and the brightest,” they orchestrated a military fiasco which they proved unable to stanch and which still haunts many policymakers.
An interesting footnote to this “tale of two books”—one pertinent to the topic of this essay: In 1967, sitting President Lyndon Johnson invited a dozen of the original “wise men” to the White House to consult about the future course of the Vietnam War, then at a stalemate. After speaking with them—Johnson allegedly quipped:
“A great group—I wish I had had them when they were twenty years younger.”
Echoing this sentiment, Dean Acheson—perhaps the doyen of the original wise men—reflected:
“We can no longer do the job we set out to do in the time we have left, and we must begin to take steps to disengage.”
Literally, he may have been talking about prosecuting the war—but I sense that he was reflecting as well on what it means to grow old and contemplate an ever diminished ambit.
At Last by a Circuitous Route: A Brief Definition
Wisdom encompasses knowledge, judgment, and action. The wise person (or group) takes into account all relevant factors and considerations; weighs their relative importance in the current (and reasonably foreseeable) contexts; arrives at a decision, a recommendation, a course of action—one which seems feasible and defensible; elects whether, and, if so, how, to effect that decision or recommendation. Assuming “go”: the wise person marshals the courage to execute the decided-upon course of action; monitors the immediate and longer-term effects of the intervention—positive, negative, too soon to tell; and then carefully considers whether to intervene again, and if so, in what manner.
Relevant Factors
Knowledge: Needless to say, one cannot be wise unless one identifies and is knowledgeable about the relevant factors—and discriminates from factors that are no longer relevant. And that knowledge needs to encompass not only the past but also the current scene, as well as likely future factors and probable consequences.
Reflection: In most circumstances, the wise person (or group) does not leap into action. And in many—perhaps even most –situations, the wise person holds back, until such time as the intervention can reasonably be launched, acted upon, and thereafter reflected on.
Intervention: When the time for speech or action is clearly at hand, the wise person acts—and does so resolutely. The action/recommendation entails no more than is necessary; and in general, in the aftermath, the wise individual remains restrained, likely in the background. But if the intervention proves ineffective, or even harmful, the wise person should be held responsible and be prepared to accept the consequences.
Learn more at thegoodproject.org
Moral and Ethical Facets: In conceptualizing Good Work—a concern of our research group for three decades—three “E” strands have proved crucial: Excellence (the work is of high quality); Engagement (the worker cares about and is involved the situation); and Ethics (the worker seeks to follow a course of action that is optimal, moral, defensible, and not self-interested—it is “beyond the self,” based on a consideration of what is good for the world, or the nation, or a particular group that is needy and worthy. The consideration and execution of good work should always be in the foreground. If one is to invoke the descriptor “wise,” good work is essential—indeed quintessential.
Considerations of Intelligence(s)
With respect to most situations in which wisdom is called for and cherished, the traditional scholastic intelligences (linguistic and logical-mathematical) are germane. Equally important are personal intelligences (understanding of others, understanding of self). Possibly at a premium is so-called existential intelligence—the inclination and capacity to reflect on big questions. And of course, when it comes to the particulars of a situation or conundrum, other intelligences may well assume a role—as an example, in issues of warfare, both spatial and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences may prove pertinent…and musical intelligence might even play a role!
Age and Experience
For most issues and conundrums, wisdom correlates with age and experience. Yet age is certainly not in itself a guarantor of wisdom; nor does youth preclude it. Libraries (including religious ones)—and newsreels and perhaps newsfeeds—are replete with accounts of young persons who thought and acted wisely, as well as accounts of older persons who would have been better off remaining inactive and silent…as implied by the above-cited comments of Dean Acheson and Lyndon Johnson.
Emotions and Personality
In most of the lines of research that I’ve undertaken (see the introduction), I’ve minimized—or at least underplayed—the roles of personality and emotions. But clearly, once one considers the achievement and possible deployment of wisdom, it’s essential to take into account the emotional states of all involved, and as appropriate, the personalities as well. With reference to the individuals and groups cited above, a thorough study would encompass these factors: It’s hard even to think about Lyndon Johnson without reflecting on his “larger-than-life” persona.
Wisdom and Lore
Every language, every literature, that I know of, plays with the idea of wisdom. Just in English, we have wise guys, wiseacres, wisenheimers, wisecracks, conventional wisdom (often used ironically), wisdom teeth (emerge in adolescence). Note that most of these wordplays are not positive! The road to wisdom may be paved with good intentions, but such aspirations alone do not suffice!
Spheres and sectors
In the examples cited so far, I have focused on political and military issues and cited individuals with relevant knowledge in these domains. But across history, and across cultures, wisdom has often been applied in personal matters—and it has been manifest by religious leaders, psychotherapists, village elders, and (at least on occasion) magicians or seers.
Wisdom is precious, elusive, but also needed—especially in perilous times. I greatly value the wise women and men whom I have been privileged to know—family members, friends, teachers—as well as those whom I only have known by reputation or by their writings. And I hope that—at least in a few circumstances—I have pursued a wise course of action; or spoken wisely; or wisely have remained in the background. And that when foolish in word or deed, I have made amends as best I could.
Closing Note…and Apologia
In another life, bearing in mind some of the references below, I might embark on a book about wise minds. Selecting positive examples—and perhaps a few “false positives”—would be an intriguing exercise in itself.
I am well aware that the topic of wisdom has been of concern to philosophers—dating back to Socrates and forward to Robert Nozick—and that in more recent times, it has been investigated by psychologists, notably Paul Baltes, Robert Sternberg, and their colleagues. A fuller treatment of this topic should be informed by a study of these and other scholars.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
For their valuable comments on earlier draw, I am grateful to Shinri Furuzawa, Annie Stachura, Carol Thompson, Dennis Thompson, and Ellen Winner. My colleague John Kao has been a valued thought partner—indeed a wise one!
SELECT REFERENCES
Baltes, P. et al. (2006). Lifespan theory and behavior in developmental psychology. In W. Damon and R. Lerner (Ed.) Handbook of Child Psychology. Wiley.
Erikson, E. H . (1969). Gandhi’s Truth. Norton.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating Minds. Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1995). Leading Minds. Basic Books, 1995
Gardner, H. (2011). Truth, Beauty and Goodness: Reframed. Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (2020). A Synthesizing Mind. MIT Press.
Gardner, H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., and Damon, W. (2001). Good Work: When Excellence and Ethics Meet. Basic Books.
Halberstam, D. (1972). The Best and the Brightest. Random House.
Isaacson, W. and Thomas, E. (1986). The Wise Men. Simon and Schuster.
Nozick, R. (1989). The Examined Life. Simon and Schuster.
Sternberg, R. (2022). Wisdom. Cambridge University Press.