# data[].attributes.body
The conversation about amorality within the broader conversation of wisdom and morality is a distraction.  People are either moral or immoral in their value systems.  And within this morality or immorality, they have integrity/consistency, or they do not.  Integrity/consistency occurs when the individual lives according to the value systems that construct their morality.  Morality is defined by the individual.  However, if the individual is under the illusion he/she/they are amoral, then he/she/they cannot access wisdom due the fundamental lack of understanding of self and how constructions of self impact understanding and perception.

A person with an immoral value system can make wise decisions (although he/she/they will not have integrity/consistency when doing so), and a person with a moral value system can make wise decisions.  But a person with an amoral value system cannot make wise decisions.

Amorality can be a thought exercise, although not a useful one, but it is not a practice.

Need morals to be wise?  Irrelevant.  People have moral value systems.  These are concepts constructed through the developmental process (see developmental psychology).

Better questions:  What are your morals?  How do you make meaning of life/experiences?  What are your biases?  Which experiences have shaped you the most?  What knowledge or types of knowledge have had the most significant influence on your thinking?  What are the practical consequences of your moral constructs on self and others? Are your moral constructs part of a larger system of moral constructs shared by an identifiable community?  If so, what are the practical consequences of that system of moral constructs on self and others?

Need wisdom to be moral?  Irrelevent.  People have moral value systems.

Better question:  How is wisdom developed or nurtured?

# data[].attributes.headline
I don’t think it’s a matter of lay people being ‘wrong’ in their view of wisdom.  It’s just that sometimes when people label a decision ‘wise’ they just mean ‘pragmatic’, and other times labeling a decision ‘wise’ is meant to include a broader perspective than just effective means-end reasoning.  We want to study both, but we need different labels for them to avoid ‘jingle, jangle’ fallacies.  I think there are plenty of terms that get at prudential decisions, but there don’t seem to be many terms that get at broader perspective judgments other than ‘wisdom’.

# data[].attributes.subject
I don’t think it’s a matter of lay people being ‘wrong’ in their view of wisdom.  It’s just that sometimes when people label a decision ‘wise’ they just mean ‘pragmatic’, and other times labeling a decision ‘wise’ is meant to include a broader perspective than just effective means-end reasoning.  We want to study both, but we need different labels for them to avoid ‘jingle, jangle’ fallacies.  I think there are plenty of terms that get at prudential decisions, but there don’t seem to be many terms that get at broader perspective judgments other than ‘wisdom’.

# data[].attributes.headline
Does studying wisdom require postulating about what is of value?

# data[].attributes.subject
Does studying wisdom require postulating about what is of value?

# data[].attributes.body
Morality is about trust in others and in society, maybe trust is the "end goal" or "product" of moral behavior

Life lesson from a 4 year old: “never eat an ice cream from both ends”

Can a child or a person with intellectual disability be wise? How much crystallized knowledge is required?

Deepak Ramola, Sabena Jameel, Scott Danielson, Diane Sunar

# data[].attributes.headline
If wisdom as a decision-making process by itself doesn’t necessarily require that one is including moral values/standards as an input into that process, then the process could generate an amoral/immoral result.  Insofar as we think of ‘wise persons’ as necessarily caring about morality, and therefore including moral concerns in their decision-making process, then we would expect (in general) that their decisions would not be amoral/immoral.  To distinguish wise decision making from merely effective instrumental reasoning, would seem to require some consideration of moral values (or what it is to live well broadly).

# data[].attributes.subject
If wisdom as a decision-making process by itself doesn’t necessarily require that one is including moral values/standards as an input into that process, then the process could generate an amoral/immoral result.  Insofar as we think of ‘wise persons’ as necessarily caring about morality, and therefore including moral concerns in their decision-making process, then we would expect (in general) that their decisions would not be amoral/immoral.  To distinguish wise decision making from merely effective instrumental reasoning, would seem to require some consideration of moral values (or what it is to live well broadly).

# data[].attributes.body
Taking the example of the tale of King Solomon from the Bible, where two women came to him to ask ownership over a baby both of them claimed as theirs. Solomon, famous for his wisdom, asked that the baby to be cut into two so to be distributed among them. That was an advice that was nowhere moral but evoked an immediate reaction from the real mother and hence solving the case. So, does it mean that wisdom is better than morality?

# data[].attributes.headline
Wisdom research is probably going to need to make peace with moral realism at some point, if not full prescriptivism.

# data[].attributes.subject
Wisdom research is probably going to need to make peace with moral realism at some point, if not full prescriptivism.

# data[].attributes.body
Chris

Think beyond the idea of wisdom as not being imbued with reality opens up a lot of ideas.

Can there be consensus on a moral component?

Role of emotions might move the consensus on the moral component.

Clark

Wisdom involves decision making, so implies ethics.

Wise person has a larger than usual frame of reference to make a wise decision.

Wise person can see issues that others are not seeing and raise that issue--including spatial aspects of wisdom (e.g. Thoreau's wisdom situated in experience at Walden Pond)

Wise person can see the temporal element--what are the likely outcomes of a decision?

Wisdom is contingent upon time, morals of the time (?).

Wisdom has an aspirational quality. Aspirations don't always succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
Should a person have more wisdom or morality?

# data[].attributes.headline
The unity of the virtues is still going to be a problem; can we solve this with nomological networks? Maybe?

# data[].attributes.subject
The unity of the virtues is still going to be a problem; can we solve this with nomological networks? Maybe?

# data[].attributes.headline
Could morality be more culture-based and wisdom less culture-dependent (or maybe even lend itself more to universal conceptions)? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Could morality be more culture-based and wisdom less culture-dependent (or maybe even lend itself more to universal conceptions)? 

# data[].attributes.headline
How do we think about the link between morality and wisdom when we can't quite agree on what either means?

# data[].attributes.subject
How do we think about the link between morality and wisdom when we can't quite agree on what either means?

# data[].attributes.body
common theme:
-morality and wisdom help eachother across the themes of self
-wisdom is focusing on something broader than one's own benefit
-caring about something broader than oneself is a main component of wisdom
-large part of wisdom is the ability to step back and live with things instead of trying to change things (accepting uncontrolability)
-does the idea of being wise is to do things for the greater good? how to define the boundaries of wisdom

# data[].attributes.headline
Other than surveys, what other methods are there for develop a model of wisdom?

# data[].attributes.subject
Other than surveys, what other methods are there for develop a model of wisdom?

# data[].attributes.headline
Can we prove that Machiavelli is unwise? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Can we prove that Machiavelli is unwise? 

# data[].attributes.body
-agree with X
-disagree with Y
-question of interest we thought of after the discussion pannel: