Tag Archives: psychiatric research





How much do you agree with the following statements on a scale of one to five, with five being ‘I strongly agree’:

1) I enjoy being exposed to diverse viewpoints

2) I have a difficult time keeping friendships

3) It is important that I understand my actions

4) I cannot filter my negative emotions

5) I tend to postpone making major decisions as long as I can

6) Others look to me to help them make choices



 A new scale for assessing wisdom based on common domains and a neurobiological model: The San Diego Wisdom Scale (SD-WISE)

Michael L. Thomas


Katherine J. Bangen


Barton W. Palmer


Averria Sirkin Martin


Julie A. Avanzino


Colin A. Depp


Danielle Glorioso


Rebecca E. Daly


Dilip V. JesteCorrespondence information about the author Dilip V. JesteEmail the author Dilip V. Jeste

Journal of Psychiatric Research

Received: July 3, 2017; Received in revised form: August 29, 2017; Accepted: September 1, 2017; Published online: September 08, 2017


Here is my commentary on this absurd research:

Dictionary definition of wisdom: n. the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment

My definition: Wisdom: n. knowledge which helps to judge accurately what is (true and/or right) and/or (just and/or moral). Unchanging wisdom is wisdom about human nature.

Based on the test questions the subsets or domains that supposedly reflect wisdom are:

Enjoyment of diverse viewpoints,

ability to form friendships easily,

awareness of one’s actions or knowing yourself very well,

being in control of negative emotions or being able to suppress them,

able to make quick decisions,

and a trusting respected personality since many come for advice or guidance.

All of these domains or subsets are qualities of a human with emotional intelligence which can be used for good or bad human purposes. It doesn’t necessarily imply that the human is actually wise too although the probability that such a human is wiser than the norm is probably greater but there is no guarantee of wisdom.

The number of variables in these badly defined domains or subsets is almost infinite and there is no chance at all that there will be an accurate correlation between the very vague domains and actual neurobiological experimental results in the brain which are just as badly defined and bounded.

The traditional stereotype of a wise human is one who is trusted and respected to give advice on most of life’s problems. In the modern world you may be very wise in your area of specialty and humans will ask trustingly for advice but in other areas of human behavior the specialist is often not very wise at all.

Having many friends is not necessarily an indication of an ability to form trusting close relationships so this domain is not accurately enough defined as to whether we are talking about close friendships or very casual and distant ones. Wise in forming close or distant relationships? Which is it?

You may be aware of your actions but you may be a very immoral human so that does not make you wise by any stretch of the imagination.

Making quick decisions assumes that they are useful ones and not erroneous ones or mistaken ones. Good not quick decision making is a function of expertise in the area of decision making which may only be a specialty area and not a general wisdom on almost all things about human nature.

You can be in control of your negative emotions and still be deceptive and a clever manipulator of humans so this quality does not necessarily make you wise.

Enjoyment of diverse viewpoints does not make you wise if you just are enjoying the conflict which ensues between humans with opposing points of view. Are they the right or moral viewpoints which you are enjoying or are they wrong and immoral ones also?


The wisdom test is vague behavioral subsets, boundaries, or domains with too many exceptions to the domains to have any convincing relevance in real life.

The test does not discriminate between the wise moral human and the wise immoral or criminal human so once again the test is incomplete and irrelevant to the wisdom question in the real world.

Wise humans are moral, have integrity, are dependable, competent, and good communicators with empathy. Nowhere in this test are these important variables considered.

The new scale for assessing wisdom is not only stupid but can almost be considered fraudulent professionalism by psychiatric researchers who are forced to publish garbage about human behavior or perish as researchers!!!

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4300 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.


If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!