Do We Learn Wisdom or is it Innate ?

[sakoz]

If we learn wisdom, then it is as accessible as any other learned or experience from memory/conditioning. Are you using it often? Do insight/aha thoughts come from wisdom? I believe they do.
If you don't agree, tentatively accept the assumption that they do, otherwise there's no point in your reading further if you don't accept the premise, temporarily.
We dont' access insights; supplication don't work either; we appear to be "recipients" of insights. Insights seem to come "out of the blue". (Out-of-the-blue is not a replicable means).
How do we 'get' more insights? No matter how sincerely we want some, we can't "make' them come. There's an instance of a scientist working for months on a problem without solution; one day he decided to take a breack and spend time with his children, and when his mind was not even on the 'problem', the answer(insight) came "out-of-the-blue".
Did you ever 'receive' a inaccurate insight? That's why we call it "wisdom".  We usually think/talk from memory/conditioning; actually 'predominantly so'; and that's a 'problem'.
We often think and believe false thoughts. (Did you ever 'not' believe a insight/eureka?) 'Regular' thoughts are often erroneous; example; "I thought the gun was empty". When a doctor says; "I thought the patient had kidney stone." When in fact the patient was suffering from acute appendicitis; is no small error; calling it 'misdiagnosis. Both examples are "misperceptions", resulting from "believing false thoughts"  Can you relate to this topic? What can we 'do' to facilitate insight after I said they "come serendipitously" out of the blue?
Two things; make a 'opening', we think all our waking moments, in 'chain like' fashion; so break  the chain so there's a "gap" between thoughts, so as to receive, and then "trust" insight will come.
Seems "iffy", but that's about all we can do, till we understand more.

"Both examples are "misperceptions", resulting from "believing false thoughts."   See why I say;  WE USE BELIEFS AS PERCEPTIONS   literally.and automatically.

[SWM]

@sakoz do you imagine something like the following?

the brain has separate compartments each responsible for a certain function. insights and wisdom come from one compartment and regular thoughts (which are almost always wrong and unreliable) come from a different compartment. the same compartment that produces unreliable thoughts produces our langauge skills.

my understanding which is informed by a small ammount of study into cognitive science is somewhat different.

thoughts that occur as cognitions whether they are wise or unwise thoughts all come from the same place. there is a part of the brain that is responsible for language and when we are engaged in didactic thinking that language centre is active but that langauge centre does not have a thinking role but more of a describing role.   

if you dont imagine either of these to be accurate could you please try to explain how you imagine these areas of the brain responsible for the important principles in your theory work together.

[pert -5]

I (think I--if I am correctly grasping your meaning sakoz) agree that it is correct perceive wisdom to be more a mode of perception than a collection of thoughts/ideas.  Can a person just be born with said perceptive trait?  I don't know.  Now, on the other hand, how one expresses this wisdom is the sole domain of intellect and thinking.  I know, I've added nothing that hasn't been said in this thread already. 

As well, a person can learn and parrot a bunch of wise sayings from, say, Confucious, but that doesn't make the person wise I wouldn't think.  The person intellectually possesses the words of wisdom, but it doesn't come from them.  They are emulators.  I see the "wisdom perspective" as focusing on singularity/simplicity rather than many/complexity.

[sakoz]

SWM, Did you just delete something you wrote? Luckily I jotted down two of your comments. You wrote:
"by pointing out that people have faulty thinking you are pointing out that they are defective." WOW; what a assumptive 'leap' on your part.
Faulty thinking is correctable; The "defectiveness" you believe may not be correctable.
You also wrote; "by pointing out untapped wisdom you are pointing out their lack of wisdom." again I say WOW, untapped implies the wisdom is present; you wrote "lack" implies they don't have wisdom.  If you deleted where you wrote that, we can see why; Is that you unspoken attitude about clients and the readers here?

When we "tap" into our wisdom we are empowered and fully capable of solving our own problems. Is that a threat to the therapy "business"?

[sakoz]

pert-5; Thank you. You are correctly grasping my meaning. You wrote; "I, agree that it is correct perceive wisdom to be more a mode of perception than a collection of thoughts/ideas." YES
Thoughts/ideas come from thought system, memory, we even have "conditioned thoughts".
Wisdom 'manifests' as thought-perceptions; creating thoughts on demand, contingent on the situation. Wisdom is "responsive", unlike memory, conditioning which is "reactive", etc.
Wisdom, the sourse, is as mysterious as was quantum before the submicroscopic level was discovered, (Brownian Motion, etc) I like to think of wisdom as my "pipe line" to evolution, manifesting through me, etc.

[sakoz]

Epictetus told us: "It's not the facts that disturb us but our thoughts about them." That's not the end of the story, it's the begining, because we are still doing it; automatically.
Pavlov demonstrated 'how' it's being done; by conditioning. Pavlov used dogs, but he did not use language/thought, he used the sound of a bell. The point is to assocciate a cue to a reaction by the involuntary. "Conditioning works on both humans and animals." Epictetus and Pavlov did the "ground work" for us; it's up to  us to complete the 'work', if and when conditioning is a problem.
Most of our conditioning is useful, conditioning is 'training' our involuntary nervous system to 'work' for us, it's analogous to using a water wheel to utilize the flowing water to turn our turbines,etc. Not all of our conditioning is dysfunctional. I like to be able to drive a car by habit and not have to think about each move, the way I did when learning/training my involuntary.
A dysfunctional habit/conditioning is to believe a false thought and then use it as a perception. Once we belive a false thought  it 'becomes' a perception, our involuntary is hard-wired to react to perceptions, whether true or false. So don't blame your involuntary for unpleasant experiences ,like, emotional suffering, dysfunctional behavior, mistakes, stress, etc.  your involuntary is doing it's job of reacting to perceptions, and it does that very well. If you want to blame, or find cause, look to "believing false thoughts". Not all thoughts are believed, so that gives us the clue that "believing has the potential of being optional". (But not when done as habit/conditioned/automatically).
De ja vu? I came to this site looking for collaboration on investigating "believing" but what did I get?  Criticism instead. Thank you pert-5 for the change. The critics want to maintain the staus quo, even if it hurts

[S. Earl Martin]

Knowledge is learned.
Wisdom can come from experience.
Not everyone has it.

I am sorry you see my and other peoples attempt to help you as criticism. That is unfortunate. Maybe it is because you still feel this is all about you and don't realize how you are effecting other people? 

[Enigma]

Wisdom is the nonsense people perpetrate as further denial that perception moves everything intelligently, so that to be moved by any reason however long-bearded is just another way to abuse each other and relationship.

Another version of the myth that man has evolved beyond the harmony of nature, this version saying, "Some people have done so."

What the hell does this even mean. 

[Enigma]

Great just what this forum needs another esoteric misunderstood genius who will change the way I think about the world by revealing the obvious-yet-hidden phenomena that lie right before our very eyes. 

[S. Earl Martin]

Enigma: Did you notice how some people make statements on here and when asked to explain them they get offended? Or they change the subject? Or they just make more vauge statements that make even less sense? But at the same time they try and talk like they are knowledgable to try and impress other people. Then claim other people are doing that with no evidence to back up their claim. I think the emporer has no cloths.

I don't mean you. I enjoy interacting with you and several others here because you actually have an understanding of how science works. We may not always agree, but at least we understand how the game is played.