This
is an association of people sympathetic to the idea that academic inquiry
should help humanity acquire more wisdom by rational means. Wisdom is
taken to be the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself
and others. It includes knowledge, understanding and technological know-how,
and much else besides. Friends of Wisdom try to encourage universities
and schools actively to seek and promote wisdom by educational and intellectual
means. At
present, Friends of Wisdom communicate with one another in the main by
email (JISCMAIL). If you wish to join, click
HERE, and then click on "join or leave the list",
or email: nick@knowledgetowisdom.org
See Friends of Wisdom Website:
www.knowledgetowisdom.org
Copyright Nicholas Maxwell All Rights Reserved
We need a revolution in the aims and methods of academic inquiry, so that the basic aim becomes to promote wisdom by rational means, instead of just to acquire knowledge.
Acquiring scientific knowledge dissociated from a more basic concern for wisdom leads, via technology and industry, to an enormous increase in the power to act.
This has led to much that is good, but also to much that is harmful. All our modern global crises are the outcome of science without wisdom. If we are to avoid in this century the horrors of the last one - wars, death camps, dictatorships, poverty, environmental damage - we urgently need to learn how to acquire more wisdom, which in turn means that our institutions of learning become devoted to that end.
The revolution we need would change every branch and aspect of academic inquiry. Social inquiry would become social methodology or philosophy, and would not be, primarily, social science. Its primary task would be to help people resolve conflicts and problems of living in more cooperatively rational ways. Social inquiry would be more intellectually fundamental than natural science. Natural science would change to include three domains of discussion: evidence, theory, and aims - the latter including discussion of metaphysics, values and politics. Academic inquiry as a whole would become a kind of people's civil service, doing openly for the public what actual civil services are supposed to do in secret for governments.
The case for the revolution in science, and in academic inquiry more generally,
is spelled out in my book From
Knowledge to Wisdom (Blackwell, 1984): see below for reviews. There is now a second edition, brought up to date, with a new introduction and three additional chapters (Pentire Press, 2007). For a Radio interview during which I expound the basic argument of From Knowledge to Wisdom click here. For a review, click here. See also my Is Science
Neurotic? (Imperial College Press, December 2004). For summaries,
see The
Basic Argument and Can
Humanity Learn to become Civilized?. For a podcast of me
briefly expounding the argument for wisdom-inquiry, click
here (and go to the bottom of the page, episode 6). For a synoptic view of my work, see How Can Life of Value Best Flourish in the Real World?
One Critic's Verdict on 2nd Edition of From Knowledge to Wisdom
“Any philosopher or other person who seeks wisdom should read this book. Any educator who loves education--especially those in leadership positions--should read this book. Anyone who wants to understand an important source of modern human malaise should read this book. And anyone trying to figure out why, in a world that produces so many technical wonders, there is such an immense "wisdom gap" should read this book. In From Knowledge to Wisdom: A Revolution for Science and the Humanities, Second Edition . . . Nicholas Maxwell presents a compelling, wise, humane, and timely argument for a shift in our fundamental "aim of inquiry" from that of knowledge to that of wisdom.”
Jeff Huggins Metapsychology
What critics are saying about Is Science Neurotic?
"This book is bursting with intellectual energy and ambition...[It]
provides a good account of issues needing debate. In accessible language,
Maxwell articulates many of today's key scientific and social issues...his
methodical analysis of topics such as induction and unity, his historical
perspective on the Enlightenment, his opinions on string theory and his
identification of the most important problems of living are absorbing
and insightful."
Clare McNiven, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12, No. 3, 2005, p.
89.
"Is science neurotic? Yes, says Nicholas Maxwell, and the sooner
we acknowledge it and understand the reasons why, the better it will be
for academic inquiry generally and, indeed, for the whole of humankind.
This is a bold claim … But it is also realistic and deserves to be
taken very seriously … My summary in no way does justice to the strength
and detail of Maxwell's well crafted arguments … I found the book
fascinating, stimulating and convincing … after reading this book,
I have come to see the profound importance of its central message."
Dr. Mathew
Iredale, The Philosopher's Magazine, Issue 31, 2005, pp. 86-87.
"… the title Is Science Neurotic? could be rewritten
to read Is Academe Neurotic? since this book goes far beyond the
science wars to condemn, in large, sweeping gestures, all of modern academic
inquiry. The sweeping gestures are refreshing and exciting to read in
the current climate of specialised, technical, philosophical writing.
Stylistically, Maxwell writes like someone following Popper or Feyerabend,
who understood the philosopher to be improving the World, rather than
contributing to a small piece of one of many debates, each of which can
be understood only by the small number of its participants…. In spite
of this, the argument is complex, graceful, and its finer points are quite
subtle…. The book's final chapter calls for nothing less than revolution
in academia, including the very meaning of academic life and work, as
well as a list of the nine most serious problems facing the contemporary
world - problems which it is the task of academia to articulate, analyse,
and attempt to solve. This chapter sums up what the reader has felt all
along: that this is not really a work of philosophy of science, but a
work of 'Philosophy', which addresses 'Big Questions' and answers them
without hesitation…. I enjoyed the book as a whole for its intelligence,
courageous spirit, and refusal to participate in the specialisation and
elitism of the current academic climate…. it is a book that can be
enjoyed by any intelligent lay-reader. It is a good book to assign to
students for these reasons, as well - it will get them thinking about
questions like: What is science for? What is philosophy for? Why should
we think? Why should we learn? How can academia contribute of the welfare
of people? … the feeling with which this book leaves the reader [is]
that these are the questions in which philosophy is grounded and which
it ought never to attempt to leave behind."
Margret Grebowicz, Metascience, 15, 2006, pp. 141-144.
"Maxwell's fundamental idea is so obvious that it has escaped notice.
But acceptance of the idea requires nothing short of a complete revolution
for the disciplines. Science should become more intellectually honest
about its
metaphysical presuppositions and its involvement in contributing to human
value. Following this first step it cures itself of its irrational repressed
aims and is empowered to progress to a more civilized world."
Professor Leemon McHenry, Review of Metaphysics, March 2006, pp. 657-659.
"Maxwell argues that the metaphysical assumptions underlying present-day
scientific inquiry, referred to as standard empiricism or SE, have led
to ominous irrationality. Hence the alarmingly provocative title; hence
also-the argument carries this far-the sad state of the world today. Nor
is Maxwell above invoking, as a parallel example to science's besetting
"neurosis," the irrational behavior of Oedipus as Freud saw
him: unintentionally yet intentionally slaying his father for love of
his mother (Mother Earth?). Maxwell proposes replacing SE with his own
metaphysical remedy, aim-oriented empiricism, or AOE. Since science does
not acknowledge metaphysical presumptions and therefore disallows questioning
them - they are, by definition, outside the realm of scientific investigation
- Maxwell has experienced, over the 30-plus years of his professional
life, scholarly rejection, which perhaps explains his occasional shrill
tone. But he is a passionate and, despite everything, optimistic idealist.
Maxwell claims that AOE, if adopted, will help deal with major survival
problems such as global warming, Third World poverty, and nuclear disarmament,
and science itself will become wisdom-oriented rather than knowledge-oriented--a
good thing. A large appendix, about a third of the book, fleshes the argument
out in technical, epistemological terms. Summing Up: Recommended.
General readers; graduate students; faculty."
Professor M. Schiff, Choice, vol. 42, no. II, July, 2005.
Is Science Neurotic? … is a rare and refreshing text that
convincingly argues for a new conception of scientific empiricism that
demands a re-evaluation of what [science and philosophy] can contribute
to one another and of what they, and all academia, can contribute to humanity…
Is Science Neurotic? is primarily a philosophy of science text,
but it is clear that Maxwell is also appealing to scientists. The clear
and concise style of the text's four main chapters make them accessible
to anyone even vaguely familiar with philosophical writing and physics…
it is quite inspiring to read a sound critique of the fragmented state
of academia and an appeal to academia to promote and contribute to social
change.
Sarah Smellie, Canadian
Undergraduate Physics Journal
"Maxwell's aspirations are extraordinarily and admirably ambitious.
He intends to contribute towards articulating and bringing about a form
of social progress that embodies rationality and wisdom... by raising
the question of how to integrate science into wisdom-inquiry and constructing
novel and challenging arguments in answer to it, Maxwell is drawing attention
to issues that need urgent attention in the philosophy of science."
Professor Hugh Lacey, Mind, Vol. 115, 2006, pp. 1154-1158.
“Maxwell has written a very important book . . . Maxwell eloquently discusses the astonishing advances and the terrifying realities of science without global wisdom. While science has brought forth significant advancements for society, it has also unleashed the potential for annihilation. Wisdom is now, as he puts it, not a luxury but a necessity . . . Maxwell’s book is first-rate. It demonstrates his erudition and devotion to his ideal of developing wisdom in students. Maxwell expertly discusses basic problems in our intellectual goals and methods of inquiry.”
Professor Joseph Davidow, Learning for Democracy, vol. 2, October 2006, pp. 78-80.
"Nicholas Maxwell's book passionately embraces Francis Bacon's dictum that '[t]he true and legitimate goal of the sciences is to endow human life with new discoveries and resources'. The book's scope is commendable. It offers a thorough critique of the contemporary philosophy and practice of both natural (Chapters 1 & 2) and social science (Chapter 3), and suggests a remedy for what the author believes is the neurotic repression of the aforementioned Baconian aims."
Slobadan Perovic, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, vol. 58, 2007, pp. 361-3.
What critics said about the first edition of From Knowledge to Wisdom
“Maxwell is advocating nothing less than a revolution (based on reason, not on religious or Marxist doctrine) in our intellectual goals and methods of inquiry ... There are altogether too many symptoms of malaise in our science-based society for Nicholas Maxwell's diagnosis to be ignored."
Professor Christopher Longuet-Higgins, Nature.
“a strong effort is needed if one is to stand back and clearly state the objections to the whole enormous tangle of misconceptions which surround the notion of science to-day. Maxwell has made that effort in this powerful, profound and important book.”
Dr. Mary Midgley, University Quarterly.
“The essential idea is really so simple, so transparently right ... It is a profound book, refreshingly unpretentious, and deserves to be read, refined and implemented.”
Dr. Stewart Richards, Annals of Science.
“Maxwell's book is a major contribution to current work on the intellectual status and social functions of science ... [It] comes as an enormous breath of fresh air, for here is a philosopher of science with enough backbone to offer root and branch criticism of scientific practices and to call for their reform.”
Dr. David Collingridge, Social Studies of Science.
"Maxwell has, I believe, written a very important book which will resonate in the years to come. For those who are not inextricably and cynically locked into the power and career structure of academia with its government-industrial-military connections, this is a book to read, think about, and act on."
Dr. Brian Easlea, Journal of Applied Philosophy.
“This book is a provocative and sustained argument for a 'revolution', a call for a 'sweeping, holistic change in the overall aims and methods of institutionalized inquiry and education, from knowledge to wisdom' ... Maxwell offers solid and convincing arguments for the exciting and important thesis that rational research and debate among professionals concerning values and their realization is both possible and ought to be undertaken.”
Professor Jeff Foss, Canadian Philosophical Review
“Wisdom, as Maxwell's own experience shows, has been outlawed from the western academic and intellectual system ... In such a climate, Maxwell's effort to get a hearing on behalf of wisdom is indeed praiseworthy.”
Dr. Ziauddin Sardar, Inquiry
"I found Maxwell's exposition and critique of the current state of establishment science to be clear and convincing."
Professor
Noretta Koertge, Isis
“Maxwell's argument ... is a powerful one. His critique of the underlying empiricism of the philosophy of knowledge is coherent and well argued, as is his defence of the philosophy of wisdom. Most interesting, perhaps, from a philosophical viewpoint, is his analysis of the social and human sciences and the humanities, which have always posed problems to more orthodox philosophers, wishing to reconcile them with the natural sciences. In Maxwell's schema they pose no such problems, featuring primarily ... as methodologies, aiding our pursuit of our diverse social and personal endeavours. This is an exciting and important work, which should be read by all students of the philosophy of science. It also provides a framework for historical analysis and should be of interest to all but the most blinkered of historians of science and philosophy.”
Dr. John Hendry, British Journal for the History of Science
“In this book, Nicholas Maxwell argues powerfully for an intellectual “revolution” transforming all branches of science and technology. Unlike such revolutions as those described by Thomas Kuhn, which affect knowledge about some aspect of the physical world, Maxwell’s revolution involves radical changes in the aims, methods, and products of scientific inquiry, changes that will give priority to the personal and social problems that people face in their efforts to achieve what is valuable and desirable.”
George Kneller, Canadian Journal of Education
“[T]here is...much of interest and, yes, much of value in this book...Maxwell is one of those rare professional philosophers who sees a problem in the divorce between thought and life which has characterized much of modern philosophy (and on both sides of the English channel, not merely in the so-called ‘analytic’ tradition’); he wishes to see thought applied to life and used to improve it. As a result, many of the issues he raises are of the first importance. . . He has . . produced a work which should give all philosophers and philosophically-minded scientists cause for reflection on their various endeavors; in particular, it should give philosophers who are content to be specialists a few sleepless nights.”
Professor Steven Yates, Metaphilosophy.
"Nicholas Maxwell (1984) defines freedom as 'the capacity to achieve what is of value in a range of circumstances'. I think this is about as good a short definition of freedom as could be. In particular, it appropriately leaves wide open the question of just what is of value. Our unique ability to reconsider our deepest convictions about what makes life worth living obliges us to take seriously the discovery that there is no palpable constraint on what we can consider."
Professor Daniel Dennett, Freedom Evolving
