Artificial Intelligence and the Quest for Wisdom
by Neville Buch
Introduction
On Artificial Intelligence, “The Perennial Philosophy” shows how to do better in the combinations of wisdom and knowledge which is open to learning. The term refers to a comprehensive understanding of philosophical thinking, and also theological thinking that follows. This is the perennial philosophy taught by philosophers and theologians. William Blake and Carl Jung believed what a person might perceive as ‘stupidity’ can be the mother of wisdom, but with slightly different relational perspectives of the observation made. The argument over Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) boils down to whether ‘A.I.’ is different in ‘kind’ or ‘degree’ in what has been happening since the dawn of humanity; and this is a perennial debate of “technology”. The word ‘kind’ has theological inferences, where as ‘degree’ is a scientific term. There is another related distinction between tékhnē and a modern technical approach to thinking. The former is an ancient argument of what is involved in making or doing. The latter is the loss of ideas (intelligence) through technical reduction. The distinctions are matter of attitudes, a disposition or state of mind.
The linear labels, though, are of no large importance, since the cognition of the point is a network of back-and-forth thought on regret, stupidity, redemption, forgiveness, and acceptance. The conflictual misunderstanding is the process, not in the over-clarifying terms. Peace is living life with all its losses and misfortune. That is wisdom and that is practically what the perennial debate of “technology” has delivered: regret, stupidity, redemption, forgiveness, and acceptance. This is a competition essay that might have been generated by A.I. but is not. The essay brings philosophical and theological perspectives to an essay to which artificial intelligence (A.I.) had the capacity to produce, and explores arguments why a person (human) would not want the A.I. version of the essay.
From a human point of “technology” is a balancing act. Anthropologically, stone tools and cave painting are evidence of the quasi-causal development of what we call the human. The Stoics recognised ‘quasi causality’ – such the tool makes the person as much as the person makes the tool. Aristotle identified the ‘noetic’ soul as the ‘human’ soul. Plato identified the ‘pharmakon’ as the epochal impact of new technologies on human thought and behaviour. Cognition histories and technical histories are quasi causally connected. As a result, the evolution of the ‘episteme’ is quasi causally related to the evolution of the ‘technical object’ which Jacques Derrida spoke of: as the ‘event’ and the ‘machine’.
The rather confusing debate between what is ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ is significant. There has been both a collapse and renewing of the Naturalism Paradigm. Hard binaries are what have collapsed and the fluid conclusions between ‘artificial’ and the ‘natural’ are what is renewed. “The Myth of Epimetheus” is the story that alludes to humanity, where there is no beginning other than who we are in the process. Human text, the language, the references, are all produced of Artificial Intelligence where the Human is an extension of the Tool. “Artificial Intelligence” has always produced the scholarly essay.
In the modern world “the natural” is a virtue, or that has been the general stance up until 21st century. The reason for the change is the collapse of ‘the nature paradigm’ as a stand-alone position. What has been realised is that when a person refers to “the natural” what is being claimed is a particular type of pattern, and the artificial being the anti-thesis. A natural pattern is what is given as the rules of change and the stable state. It has a good fit with Stoicism. An artificial pattern is what has been introduced to challenge the rules of change and the stable state. It has a good fit with Anarchism. It should be politically obvious that there are many positions on the scale between stoicism and anarchism. The problem with humanity is the tendency to switch between extreme positions.
Perennial Humanity and Digital Humanity
Perennialism is a school of thought in philosophy and spirituality that posits that the recurrence of common themes, questions which focus on universal truths about the nature of reality, humanity, ethics, and consciousness. Perennial philosophy is more about new questions arising from temporary knowledge positions. Here is the often-thought popular misunderstanding. It is assumed that perennial wisdom is about something completely unchanging. Instead, the position is that which paradoxically continues unabated while amalgamated change occurs over time, and the change is as semantics and other thoughts. It goes to the old adage (wisdom) that the more things change the more they are the same. The reversal of the adage is also a truism. One way to deal with this unconventional truism is to open up the paradox of ‘The One and the Many’. The paradox disappears between monism and pluralism when, first, it is realised that different languages are at play for different reasons, and, secondly, that binaries do not work in these language contexts, and we must turn to scopings and spectrums.
Finally, is the realisation that ancient language games have to find their fit in the modern compatibilism. In the discipline of philosophy, Compatibilism began as the basic position that the belief that free will and determinism are mutually compatible and that it is possible to believe in both without being logically inconsistent. The extension of this position are philosophies and theologies where compatibility of all subjects can find a fit in the whole (monism) while always maintaining diversity and a unique position (pluralism). It is monism without any final answer (fallibilism: propositions can be accepted even though they cannot be conclusively proven or justified). It is pluralism without abandoning traditional language, and a step up from the concerns of relativism. Both the relationships and the fixed connections are constructed as holistic knowledge. Perspectivism (that somethings are always bound to the interpretive perspectives of those observing it) is “kept in check” by the totality of the schema, and totalitarian positions are avoided in the plurality of schemas considered and placed in a universe of thought. The theory of truth in this reasoning is coherence, but a coherence which is opened to corrections from outside of the adopted schema.
A common type of schema in perennial philosophy is spiral historiography; a view that events never repeat, but patterns of human thought and action do. Our humanity spirals in patterns of historical challenges and responses. It is different to “digital humanity”.
While there is something of ‘challenge-and-response’ in digital humanity, the process is mainly calculated. It is the emergence of machine learning within the human condition. Since mathematics has not only been useful, but a flourishing aspect of humanity, machine learning in itself is not bad nor evil. The problem begins with the reduction process of calculating where something of the knowledge is lost. It lost because the science makes the judgement that these parts of the knowledge are no longer relevant. Hence, the paradox that scientific knowledge can both progress and regress in the exact same innovation. This is where the full accounting has to take place in relation to costs and benefits to our humanity.
Unfortunately weighing up the costs and benefits come down to political judgement: the power to decide. If the political players are humanitarians, the judgement will weigh more heavily upon the human values in the costs and benefits. If not, then humanity is subjected to faulty judgements that ride on narrow self-interest. Self-interest is a modern virtue but the political rhetoric hides more narrow considerations under the cloak of ‘collective self-interest’. The faulty rationalism is the gross, political, utilitarianism. It is a paradoxical ‘the one’ and ‘the many’, finally resolved in a narrow ‘collective self-interest’ defeating, rhetorically, the broader set of virtues.
The corrective reasoning in the arguments works from the starting point of understanding the difference and connections between “wisdom” and “knowledge”. It then works from the understandings of the impacts that A.I. already has, and will continue to have, within human cognition. It has widely become unfruitful to pursue finer and finer definitions of A.I. but, instead, an examination in the concepts of “natural” and “artificial” is required. The “human” is at the centre of that examination since it is only of human intelligence that the concepts have been derived. From preceding arguments, the arrival of the conclusion happens. Human-generated comprehensive education is what we understand, in summative terms, as wisdom. Certainly, A.I. conceived as the extension of human intelligence should be a part of the pathway to wisdom. Unfortunately, that is not the common understanding of A.I. This is because two theses of knowledge construction are competing in our world. The dominant and unwise view of “knowledge” is the product of technical reasoning. It is not, rather “knowledge” is the product of understanding (Verständnis). For example, the view that universities are for ‘Job-Ready’ outcomes. Australian Higher Education policy decision-makers in the last 30 years have not paid attention to understanding tékhnē. Where knowledge and wisdom meet are the alternative, spiritual, views. It is that knowledge is also for understanding (Hegel’s Spirit). In the Socratic method, it is, that it is better to be understood and to understand The Other, than to claim ‘we know’ in highly technical sense.
Wisdom and Knowledge
Wisdom becomes apparent, phenomenologically, at end of a significant other’s life; at a funeral, for example, when there is an evaluation of a life. The passion is often one of regret or defeating regret in a type of acceptance: traditionally Stoic, Cynic, and Christian in their ancient meaning. Modern meaning is too often the denial stage (first) in the model of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. “No Regrets in the Evening of Life” (2015) is a title given to a primary school history, deliberately, to indicate this wisdom. Every older generation becomes nostalgic about their earliest school days, but this is not helpful to understand Aristotle’s principle of having a flourishing life; hence, no regrets.
Some of the ways history of knowledge is approached have been useful for historians working on the history of education. A broad range of philosophers and theologians, throughout history, relate to each other in seeking to shed light on the different type of learning that 1) knowledge and 2) wisdom conveys. The former is formal, and the latter is said to be informal; Lebensphilosophie, a German philosophical movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and translated as ‘philosophy of life’. This complicates the possibility for a simple binary. Much of Lebensphilosophie is actually formal writing of the philosophy discipline.
The misconceptions on knowledge and wisdom lies in the intense political battles, played out over an epistemic dispute; for example, between rationalism and empiricism. The compatibilist philosophers have been able to demonstrate that not all knowledge is official (formal), and official and unofficial knowledge can interact. Intuition is the ability to acquire knowledge, without recourse to conscious reasoning or needing an explanation. Intuitionism is a position advanced by L. E. J. Brouwer in philosophy of mathematics, derived from Kant’s claim that all mathematical knowledge is knowledge of the pure forms of the intuition — that is, intuition that is not empirical. Furthermore, the compatibilist resolutions for the Internalism and Externalism debates point to epistemic layering within a scoping set of thought: human motivation, knowledge claim, justification, meaning, and truth. Internalism is the thesis that no fact about the world can provide reasons for action independently of desires and beliefs. Externalism is the thesis that reasons are to be identified with objective features of the world. The internal–external distinction is a distinction used in philosophy to divide an ontology into two parts: an internal part concerning observation related to philosophy, and an external part concerning a specific question related to philosophy. The resolutions are finding epistemic fits for ontological theories, and if there is no concern for ontology in a specific question, then there is no conflict.
The State of Affairs for such a person, what they think, could be well true and correct, but there is no such knowledge until learning occurs. Perspectivism is the epistemological principle that perception of and knowledge of something are always bound to the interpretive perspectives of those observing it. While perspectivism does not regard all perspectives and interpretations as being of equal truth or value, it holds that no one has access to an absolute view of the world cut off from perspective. Perspectivism may be regarded as an early form of epistemological pluralism (but not necessarily). Metaphilosophy is “the investigation of the nature of philosophy”. Its subject matter includes the aims of philosophy, the boundaries of philosophy, and its methods. The methodology speaks to the possibility of knowledge, and the nature of truth. Hence, there are no true reasoning to adopt either relativist and absolutist conclusions in a forced decision between knowledge and wisdom.
All that has been stated so far operates as cognition. Cognition is the “mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses”. It encompasses all aspects of intellectual functions and processes such as: perception, attention, thought, imagination, intelligence, the formation of knowledge, memory and working memory, judgment and evaluation, reasoning and computation, problem-solving and decision-making, comprehension and production of language. Cognitive processes use existing knowledge to discover new knowledge. In cognition there is no ‘real’ separation between thought and emotion, and separation is an artificial devise for analytic purpose. In neuroscience – the scientific study of the nervous system (the brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nervous system), its functions, and its disorders – there is no functional separation between the parts and the whole system (being cognition). The argument is borne out in the history of cognition (graph):
Cognition is the system, but more comprehensively in the humanities (thinking like humans; with social science), it is the Multi-layer Worldview Model and Personalism which is the outcome in knowledge. A ‘worldview’ (also world-view) or Weltanschauung is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing the whole of the individual’s or society’s knowledge, culture, and point of view. A worldview can include natural philosophy; fundamental, existential, and normative postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and ethics. A model, compared to ‘a worldview’, is an informative representation of an object, person, or system.
From another perspective, the knowledge outcome is consciousness – as awareness of internal and external existence – or persons – as a being who has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness, and being a part of a culturally established form of social relations such as kinship, ownership of property, or legal responsibility (personality).
The antithesis of both wisdom and knowledge is stupidity; as a personality trait. It appears that we are living in an age of stupidity. Stupidity, though, can be the mother of wisdom through Regret (the father). It is not necessary so, but it happens. Regret can teach us the corrective to past-stupidity to give birth to Wisdom, inter-seeding the mother, whose true name and nature is Sophia (philosophy). Otherwise, stupidity is stupidity, a negative characteristic without redemption.
Using knowledge, The Spiral History Theory of knowledge and stupidity performs wisdom as the Thinking Historiographically Model (2015).
This is the concluding point of Comprehensive Education and Knowledge for Understanding in the last section of the essay.
Wisdom as Human-generated Comprehensive Education and Knowledge for Understanding (a ‘human’ conclusion)
Wisdom is the human-generated comprehensive education and knowledge for understanding, and as such is where the Artificial Intelligence will-could become stump in its endeavours to ‘communicate’.
As practical examples of communication, there are five technical arguments of urban sociology: the climate-change (and related health issues) agenda, the spatial scoping, the sufficient and comprehensive policy, the sufficient and comprehensive planning, and the community valuing as the general valuing and ethos of our historical timing in the 2020s (i.e., we no longer tolerate the institutional ‘bullshit’ – a technical term in applied philosophy, see Harry G. Frankfurt’s infamous essay, Bullshit, Princeton University Press, 2005). There is also the spatial argument in the other overlapping arguments to which is significantly connected to community costs and rental affordability. The community’s argument here is also for the state and municipal authorities to share its effective and comprehensive valuing. Comprehensiveness is not completeness but sufficiency.
The example insights (above paragraph) of interdisciplinary studies can only be achieved as a reasonable understanding of a comprehensive layered worldview. In conclusion, there is here a teaching review of the previous essay sections and pointing out the connections between the argument and the global literature; as dot points for the brevity in describing a human worldview, and not the machine Artificial Intelligence produced. We find a way to layer understanding in the worldview:
Layer 01. Bringing Wisdom and Knowledge Together
- Wisdom as a General Theory of Knowledge and judgment about excellence in mind and virtue, and not simply everyday realization in persons and products. (Baltes & Kunzmann 2004).
- Wisdom as Expert Knowledge System. (Ardelt 2004). The key debate on knowledge and wisdom is the place of expertise.
- Wisdom, Moderation, and Elenchus in Plato’s ‘Apology’. (King 2008). Elenchus is the Socratic method of eliciting truth by question and answer, especially as used to refute an argument. Moderation is its arrival point.
- The Wisdom of Many in One Mind. (Herzog & Hertwig 2009). Improving Individual Judgments with Dialectical Bootstrapping. (Williams 1981-2005).
- Double Ignorance and Socrates’ Divine Knowledge. (Layne 2010). Ignorance is a lack of scoping, and Divine Knowledge is the existential universality.
- Aristotle’s Empiricist Theory of Doxastic Knowledge. (Lorenz & Morison 2019).
- Love, Truth and Moral Judgement. (Carr 2019). Doxastic knowledge is a type of knowledge that is related to belief. A non-belief knowledge is Tacit Knowledge.
Layer 02. Historical Ethics
- Nietzsche’s Ethics of History. (Berkowitz 1994). Nietzche changed ethics in the paradigm of modernism, but this is compatible with traditional Stoic, Cynic, and Christian ancient meaning.
- Hesitating before the Judgment of History. (Brook 2012). History is a matter of judgement, and requires deep and wide consideration (slow learning).
- Wisdom and Its Relation to Ethical Attitude in Organizations. (Oden, Ardelt, & Ruppel 2015). For the lack of understanding in point 8 and 9, and 11, organisations fail in their learning, and their applications crumble.
- Exploring a meeting point between knowledge and wisdom. (Rooney 2015). Knowledge appreciates generosity and this ethical action links the two together.
Layer 03. Semantics and Forms
- Form and Meaning in the Prologue of Herodotus. (Bravo & Węcowski 2004). Form and Meaning is inescapable to have knowledge and wisdom.
Layer 04. Spirituality
- (Robertson 2003). There is a Process of Awakening in modernism we call “Spirit”.
- Eastern and Western Aesthetic Spirits. (Guo & Zhang 2012). One of these ‘spirit’ process is aesthetic but wisdom is to balance out the processes, including ethics.
Layer 05. Humanism
- Dialectics and Practical Wisdom. (Wang & Xie 2006). Communication is the key for Practical Wisdom
- Theology and The Knowledge of Persons. (Stump 2021). In the early 20th century Theology and Personalism combine to correct the misapprehension of modernism. Personalism is a theory or system based on subjective ideas or applications, related to the quality of being personal.
- Human Flourishing, The Positive Humanities. (Pawelski 2022). Positive humanism can be both ‘religion’ and ‘secularity’ and seek the flourishing of Self/Non-Self and Other.
Layer 06. Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial intelligence and knowledge management: (Sanzogni, Guzman, & Busch 2017). The challenge for artificial intelligence for knowledge management is the capacity to question the tacit dimension.
- Unravelling Tacit Knowledge. (Rosen & Zeira 2000). Tacit knowledge is the knowledge we possess that is garnered from personal experience and context. It’s the information that, if asked, would be the most difficult to write down, articulate, or present in a tangible form. Social Workers perform very well in Tacit Knowledge.
Layer 07. Wrapped up as a Paradigm of Education
- Using Knowledge for Control in Fragmented Policy Arenas. (Weiss & Gruber 1984). Education through the paradigm of schooling is very controlling (Macklin 1976).
- Recovering Practical Wisdom in Teacher Education. (Phelan 2005). Teacher Education often goes wrong because the Practical Wisdom is lost among teachers burdened by the obsession with instructional learning.
- Action and Inquiry in Dewey’s Philosophy. (Rogers 2007). Against the instructional learning movement is the wisdom of Action and Inquiry.
- Cultivating Wisdom within Education (Doetzel 2014). Rather than government job-ready policies, true knowledge and its wisdom comes in comprehensive education.
It is therefore possible to obtain a very good essay produced by a A.I. software. The capacity for A.I. to expand intellectual capacity and contribute towards wisdom is enormous but it is not straightforward and it requires a lot of effort. Much of what A.I. can do is to expose the connections in thought and increase academic credibility. The challenge is that it will change the ways of research and learning into less-comprehensive outcomes because the outcomes had ignored the perennial philosophy.
The historically sound approach to A.I. is founded on Bernard Stiegler’s advice that you must ‘adopt’ the new technology in order to be able to ‘convert’ it into the good. You can’t get cured without taking your medicine but then you have to learn how to use it with wisdom. This essay has laid out the conversion process.
******
The author wishes to acknowledge and thank another human being for assistance in producing this essay, Dr Neil Peach.
Bibliography
Ardelt, M. (2004). Wisdom as Expert Knowledge System: A Critical Review of a Contemporary Operationalization of an Ancient Concept. Human Development, 47(5), 257–285. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26763810
Baltes, P. B., & Kunzmann, U. (2004). The Two Faces of Wisdom: Wisdom as a General Theory of Knowledge and Judgment about Excellence in Mind and Virtue vs. Wisdom as Everyday Realization in People and Products. Human Development, 47(5), 290–299. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26763812
Berkowitz, P. (1994). Nietzsche’s Ethics of History. The Review of Politics, 56(1), 5–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1407565
Bravo, B., & Węcowski, M. (2004). The Hedgehog and the Fox: Form and Meaning in the Prologue of Herodotus. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 124, 143–164. https://doi.org/10.2307/3246155
Brook, T. (2012). Hesitating before the Judgment of History. The Journal of Asian Studies, 71(1), 103–114. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41350053
Buch, Neville (2015). No Regrets in the Evening of Life: The History of Junction Park State School (1888-2013). Boolarong Press (pp. 459).
Buch, Neville (2022). Extraordinary Times and the Wisdom of Ages, Dr Neville Buch Blog (ABN: 86703686642), August 9, 2022.
Buch, Neville (2024). Dr Neville Buch’s Philosophy and History, Dr Neville Buch Blog (ABN: 86703686642), April 10, 2023.
Buch, Neville (2024). Damien B. Schlarb, Melville’s Wisdom: Religion, Skepticism, and Literature in Nineteenth-Century America, Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 37(1), Special Issue: New Perspectives on Religions and Traditions, 135-7, ISBN 978-0-197-58556-6 (hbk).
Buch, Neville (2025). Ontological Working Conclusions, Dr Neville Buch Blog (ABN: 86703686642), January 3, 2025.
Carr, D. (2019). Love, Truth and Moral Judgement. Philosophy, 94(370), 529–545. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26842759
Freire, Paulo P. (1998a). Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Grayling, A.C. (2002). Meditations for the Humanist: Ethics for a Secular Age, Oxford University Press.
Guldi, Jo, and David Armitage (2014). The History Manifesto, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doetzel, N.-A. (2014). Cultivating Wisdom Within Education: A Mind/Heart Synergy. The Journal of Educational Thought (JET) / Revue de La Pensée Éducative, 47(1/2), 88–97. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24713054
Guo, Z., & Zhang, L. (2012). Wisdom and Knowledge: The Outline of Eastern and Western Aesthetic Spirits. Frontiers of Philosophy in China, 7(1), 90–111. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44259373
Haack, Susan (1993). Evidence and Inquiry: Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology, London: Wiley-Blackwell.
Haack, Susan (1997). Manifesto of a Passionate Moderate: Unfashionable Essays, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Haack, Susan (2003). Defending Science-Within Reason: Between Scientism and Cynicism, New York: Prometheus Books.
Herzog, S. M., & Hertwig, R. (2009). The Wisdom of Many in One Mind: Improving Individual Judgments with Dialectical Bootstrapping. Psychological Science, 20(2), 231–237. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40065058
Heuer, Ulrike and Gerald Lang (eds., 2012). Luck, Value and Commitment: Themes from the Ethics of Bernard Williams, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hudson, Wayne (2016). Australian Religious Thought, Monash University Publishing.
King, C. S. (2008). Wisdom, Moderation, and Elenchus In Plato’s “Apology.” Metaphilosophy, 39(3), 345–362. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24439908
Layne, D. A. (2010). From Irony to Enigma: Discovering Double Ignorance and Socrates’ Divine Knowledge. Méthexis, 23, 73–90. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43739087
Lorenz, H., & Morison, B. (2019). Aristotle’s Empiricist Theory of Doxastic Knowledge. Phronesis, 64(4), 431–464. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26832222
Macintyre, Stuart (2005). The Historian’s Conscience: Australian historians on the ethics of history, Melbourne University Press.
Macklin, Michael (1976). When Schools are Gone: A Projection of the Thought of Ivan Illich, St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.
Noddings, Nel (1984). Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Oden, C. D., Ardelt, M., & Ruppel, C. P. (2015). Wisdom and Its Relation to Ethical Attitude in Organizations. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 34(2), 141–164. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44074849
Pawelski, J. O. (2022). The Positive Humanities: A Focus on Human Flourishing. Daedalus, 151(3), 206–221. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48681154
Phelan, A. M. (2005). A Fall from (Someone Else’s) Certainty: Recovering Practical Wisdom in Teacher Education. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de l’éducation, 28(3), 339–358. https://doi.org/10.2307/4126474
Raz, Joseph (2003). The Practice of Value, edited and introduced by R. Jay Wallace, with commentaries by Christine M. Korsgaard, Robert Pippin, Bernard Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Robertson, B. M. (2003). Spirituality: The Process of Awakening. Race, Gender & Class, 10(2), 121–130. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41675078
Rogers, M. L. (2007). Action and Inquiry in Dewey’s Philosophy. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 43(1), 90–115. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40321175
Rooney, D. (2015). Knowledge appreciates your generosity: exploring a meeting point between knowledge and wisdom. Prometheus, 33(4), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2016.1229851
Rosen, A., & Zeira, A. (2000). Unraveling “Tacit Knowledge”: What Social Workers Do and Why They Do It. Social Service Review, 74(1), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1086/514459
Sanzogni, L., Guzman, G., & Busch, P. (2017). Artificial intelligence and knowledge management: questioning the tacit dimension. Prometheus, 35(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2017.1364547
Stiegler, Bernard (1998). Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus, Translators George Collins and Richard Beardsworth, Stanford University Press.
Stump, E. (2021). Theology and The Knowledge of Persons. Roczniki Filozoficzne / Annales de Philosophie / Annals of Philosophy, 69(3), 9–28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27068952
Wang, N., & Xie, Y. (2006). Dialectics and Practical Wisdom. Frontiers of Philosophy in China, 1(2), 245–253. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30209967
Weiss, J. A., & Gruber, J. E. (1984). Using Knowledge for Control in Fragmented Policy Arenas. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 3(2), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/3323934
Williams, Bernard (1981). Moral Luck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, Bernard (1985). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, London: Fontana.
Williams, Bernard (1995). Making Sense of Humanity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, Bernard (1995). World, Mind, and Ethics: Essays on the ethical philosophy of Bernard Williams, J.E.J. Altham and Ross Harrison (eds.), with “Replies” by Bernard Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, Bernard (2002): Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Williams, Bernard (2005). Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Williams, Bernard (2005). The Sense of the Past: Essays on the History of Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Featured Image:
Mind-Reality-dreamstime_xs_45497563.jpg
Perspectives Of Mind
*****
Neville Buch
Latest posts by Neville Buch (see all)
- Changeling Leadership - April 21, 2025
- ‘Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?’ (David Pinder) - April 21, 2025
- Bob Dylan’s Ballad of a Thin Man - April 19, 2025