Maksim Rudnev, Research Associate, Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Veli Mitova, Professor in Philosophy and Director of the African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, University of Johannesburg
We all admire wise people, don’t we? Whether it’s a thoughtful teacher, a compassionate doctor, or an elder in the community, we recognise wisdom when we see it. But have you ever thought about how people in different cultures perceive wisdom? Does someone in Morocco view a wise person in the same way as someone in Ecuador? Our recent study explored how people across cultures think of wisdom.
This large-scale project required a joint effort of 34 researchers across fields of philosophy, psychology, anthropology, social science and psychometrics – and from all over the world, connected in a research consortium called The Geography of Philosophy.
What we found was somewhat surprising. Wisdom may appear to be shaped by cultural differences, but the core aspects of what makes someone wise are largely the same across cultures. From urban college students in Japan to villagers in South Africa, participants associated wisdom with two key characteristics: reflective orientation and socio-emotional awareness. We explain what that means below.
Contrary to widespread stereotypes, people recognise wisdom in a similar way across east and west, south and north. Despite the divisions of the world, we see wisdom in the same individuals and associate it with similar traits. Are we indeed more alike than we are different, when it comes to how we perceive wisdom? And what characterises wise people?
These are the characteristics of wise people
There are two key characteristics. Reflective orientation is about people who think before acting, carefully consider different perspectives, and use logic and past experiences to guide their decisions. They’re the type of person who keeps their cool in difficult situations, taking time to weigh all the options before making a move.
The second is socio-emotional awareness. Wise people are good at understanding and caring about the thoughts and feelings of others. They pay attention to emotions and consider different views on the situation. Such an individual might be skilled at mediating conflicts by understanding each party’s point of view, or be adept at providing emotional support during difficult times.
Together, these two dimensions combine to form the global image of wisdom. The study suggests that the wisest people are those who balance both, showing strong abilities in reasoning while also being emotionally and socially aware.
A highly reflective person who is suppressing their own emotions but doesn’t notice the social context of the problem wouldn’t be called wise. Likewise, someone who is entirely driven by emotion and the social environment but fails to make logical connections wouldn’t be called wise either. Real wisdom, according to our study, is about finding a balance between thoughtful reasoning, social understanding, and emotional awareness.
Cultures do differ, but not as much as you might think
To uncover these dimensions, we employed a method sometimes called experimental philosophy. Participants across 16 different cultures in 12 countries on five continents compared a set of targets to each other. For example, one of the questions asked participants to compare whether a doctor or a religious person was more likely to think logically when making a hard life decision with no right or wrong answers. Our participants also rated themselves. Then we asked how wise each of these persons were.
When we started this project, we expected to find big differences between cultures. Previous research suggested that people in “the west” use and value analytical thinking, which tends to dismiss social and emotional parts of the situation. In contrast, individuals in “the east” emphasise holistic thinking, that is, all-encompassing views of complex situations.
But that’s not what we found. While there were some small differences – people in South Africa, for example, placed more importance on nature and divinity when thinking about socio-emotional awareness – the overall picture was strikingly similar. Across the globe, people rated individuals who were both reflective and socially and emotionally aware as the wisest. For instance, they named a doctor and a 75-year-old person as the wisest, and at the same time the highest on both dimensions.
What was particularly fascinating was that people tended to rate themselves differently from how they rated others. Most people saw themselves as less reflective but more socially and emotionally aware than the “wise” figures they were asked to rate. In other words, people were ready to admit a moderate level of their own intellectual capabilities, but they were quite confident in their ability to understand and care for others.
Why this matters
This research defies stereotypes of a cold analytical ideal of “the west” and a social-minded and emotionally driven image of “the east” and “the south”. The idea that wisdom is purely intellectual, or conversely, purely social or divine, is too simplistic. It also highlights that wisdom manifests in a balance of traits traditionally attributed to different cultures.
In a time when global cooperation is more important than ever, recognising our shared appreciation for certain qualities can help bridge cultural divides.
The study opens up new avenues for research. Could these dimensions of wisdom help us understand how to solve global problems? Are people more likely to trust leaders who show both reflective thinking and socio-emotional awareness? And how do these qualities affect the way we handle personal relationships, difficult decisions, or conflicts?
One thing is clear: wisdom is something we all value, no matter where we come from. By understanding it better, we can not only become wiser ourselves but also learn to appreciate wisdom in others, wherever they may be.
Veli Mitova receives funding from the John Templeton Foundation and the National Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences.
Maksim Rudnev does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
