By+Claudia+Hammond

Wisdom is something thats hard to define and yet somehow we know it when we see it. The wise people stay calm in a crisis. They can step back and see the bigger picture. Theyre thoughtful and self-reflective. They recognise the limits of their own knowledge， consider alternative perspectives， and remember that the world is always changing.

Wisdom mustnt be confused with intelligence. Although intelligence helps， you can be intelligent without being wise. The wise people tolerate uncertainty and remain optimistic that even tricky problems do have solutions. They can judge what is true or right. Its quite a list.

So， how do you become wiser？ Psychologists have been studying wisdom for decades， and they have good news for us. We can all make efforts to be wiser and we might even succeed.

The reasons that we might want to follow their advice go beyond the obvious benefit of gaining wisdom to make good decisions. Wise reasoning is associated with a whole lot of1） positives： higher life satisfaction， fewer negative feelings， better relationships and less depressive rumination2）， according to Igor Grossman of the University of Waterloo in Canada. He and his colleagues even found evidence that the wisest people might live longer. The wiser people were， the higher their levels of well-being， particularly as they got older. Intelligence made no difference to well-being， probably because IQ levels dont reflect a persons ability to foster good relationships or make decisions in everyday life.

Grossman is convinced that wisdom is not simply a stable trait that you either possess or dont. If true， this is good news. It means that at least were wise some of the time.

Think back to yesterday. What was the most challenging situation you faced in your day？ And how did you work out what to do？ Grossman put questions like this to the participants in his recent study. People wrote about being late for meetings because of the traffic or the arguments they had with families and colleagues. The researchers examined their styles of reasoning in order to assess their wisdom. Did they recognise that their knowledge was limited？ Did they see any positives in what seemed on the face of it to be a negative situation？ He found that some people appeared to be wise sages in one situation， but not in another.

So why the difference in different situations？ People were wiser when they were with their friends. It made them more likely to consider the bigger picture， to think of other perspectives and to recognise the limits of their own knowledge. When people were alone they seemed to get so involved in a situation that they didnt even think about alternatives.

This means wisdom might be more common than we think. “We are possibly all capable of some aspect of wisdom. Its just not all the time，” says Grossman.

Some people still displayed more wisdom than others and some were more foolish， but not across every situation. This provides hope. If we can be wise sometimes， maybe we can learn to be wise more often. And the finding that wise reasoning improves with age suggests we can get better at it.

The question is how to do it. For Cornell University psychologist Robert Sternberg， wisdom is all about balance. A wise person is able to complete a mental juggling3） act—to balance the short-term with the long-term， self-interest with the interests of others， while considering all the options—adapting to the current situation， trying to shape it or looking for a new situation.

Following Sternbergs model， what you need to do is to remember to work out what all the different interests are in a given dilemma， both in the short and long-term and to pay attention to the changing environment and how it might be shaped.

In a kind of school of wisdom， Grossman has experimented with different strategies in the lab. People were taught to take a different perspective by imagining they were taking a birds-eye-view of the situation or as if they were watching events as a fly on the wall. The idea is to try to distance yourself from the immediate experience. Even talking about yourself in the third person can help. So when I have a dilemma， I should be asking， what would Claudia do？

Sometimes we could take it a step further than speaking in the third person and actually ask someone else what they think we should do. We are often wiser about other peoples lives than about our own. One of my favourite studies on time perception involves the planning fallacy4）， the mistake that many of us make when we think we can finish a job far more quickly than we really can. Whether its attempting to redecorate your living room in a day or finishing a work project in an evening， were often disappointed when we fail. We tend to think that in the future well have more time because well be better-organised versions of ourselves. Sadly we probably wont be.

But although were bad at judging our own time-frames， were much better at working out other peoples. In one study， students were asked to estimate when they were likely to finish an assignment and when other students would finish theirs. They were far better at guessing other peoples timings， because they took into account unpredictable interruptions such as getting flu or coming home to find the washing machine has flooded the kitchen. When it comes to our own lives， our natural optimism seems to stop us factoring in potential problems.

So can you set out to be wise？ Yes， but there are an awful lot of factors to remember. You need to take into account that people will have different goals， priorities and responses to your own， across the short- and long-term. If you can juggle all that， you probably are showing wisdom. But the complexity shouldnt stop us from trying. As Grossman told me， “Its not that you suddenly become the next Buddha， but you do become a little bit wiser.”

. New Oriental English

俗話說：“當(dāng)局者迷，旁觀者清?！痹谖覀冏非笾腔壑畷r(shí)，這句話也同樣適用。智慧關(guān)乎選擇。我們有時(shí)做出一些愚蠢的決定，并非是因?yàn)槲覀內(nèi)狈χ腔?，而是因?yàn)槲覀兾茨軓漠?dāng)時(shí)的情境中抽身，從更客觀、理性的角度看待問題。所以，智慧其實(shí)離你并不遙遠(yuǎn)，你如果想變得更有智慧，不妨從化身第三者開始。

智慧難以定義，但我們一旦見到，便可確定這就是智慧。智慧之人能在危機(jī)關(guān)頭保持鎮(zhèn)定。他們能后退一步，縱覽全局。他們考慮周全，自我反思，承認(rèn)自身學(xué)識(shí)有限，廣納不同觀點(diǎn)，并牢記世界總在變化。

智慧與智力不可混為一談。盡管智力很有用處，但你可能很聰明，卻不一定有智慧。智慧之人可以容忍不確定因素，保持樂觀，相信再棘手的問題也總歸有解決的辦法。他們能明辨是非真假。其優(yōu)點(diǎn)實(shí)在太多。

那么，怎樣才能更有智慧呢？幾十年來，心理學(xué)家們一直在研究智慧，并給我們帶來了好消息：我們都可以為更有智慧而努力，或許最終能取得成功。

我們可能想采納他們的建議，不僅是因?yàn)樵鲩L智慧明顯有助于我們做出好的決定。來自加拿大滑鐵盧大學(xué)的伊戈?duì)枴じ窳_斯曼認(rèn)為，審慎的推理活動(dòng)與許多積極因素息息相關(guān)：生活滿意度更高、負(fù)面情緒更少、人際關(guān)系更好、抑郁沉思更少。格羅斯曼及其同事甚至發(fā)現(xiàn)了證據(jù)，表明最有智慧的人可能壽命更長。人越是富有智慧，幸福指數(shù)越高，年長時(shí)尤甚。而智力則無關(guān)幸福，或許是因?yàn)橹巧趟讲⒉荒芊从吵鋈藗冊谌粘Ｉ钪薪⒘己萌穗H關(guān)系或做出決定的能力。

格羅斯曼認(rèn)為，智慧并不是一種穩(wěn)定的特性，不是那種你要么擁有、要么沒有的東西。如果真如其所言，這不失為一個(gè)好消息——這意味著我們起碼在某些時(shí)候是有智慧的。

回想昨日，你昨天面對的最具挑戰(zhàn)性的情形是什么？你又是如何想到應(yīng)對辦法的？格羅斯曼在其近期的研究中向參與者詢問了類似問題。參與者寫出的情形包括因堵車而開會(huì)遲到，或是與家人和同事爭吵。研究人員仔細(xì)觀察了參與者的推理方式以評(píng)估其智慧。他們是否意識(shí)到自己的知識(shí)有限？他們能否從看似不利的處境中發(fā)現(xiàn)積極的一面？格羅斯曼發(fā)現(xiàn)，有些人在一種處境中好似智者，但在另一種處境中又并非如此。

那么為何在不同處境中會(huì)有不同的表現(xiàn)呢？和朋友共處時(shí)，人們更有智慧，也更有可能從大局考慮，從其他角度看待問題，并意識(shí)到自身學(xué)識(shí)有限。但獨(dú)處時(shí)，人們似乎過于關(guān)注某一種情境，甚至想不到變通。

這意味著智慧或許比我們想象的更為常見。格羅斯曼說：“我們或許都具備某方面的智慧，只是時(shí)有時(shí)無罷了?！?/p>

一些人總會(huì)比其他人展露更多的智慧，一些人則更蠢，但也并非在所有情況中都是如此。這就帶來了希望。如果我們有時(shí)能夠有智慧，或許就能在更多時(shí)候?qū)W著變得有智慧。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)年紀(jì)越大，審慎推理的能力越強(qiáng)，這表明我們可以變得更有智慧。

問題是如何實(shí)現(xiàn)。在康奈爾大學(xué)心理學(xué)家羅伯特·斯滕伯格看來，智慧關(guān)乎平衡。智慧之人思考時(shí)能兼顧好幾個(gè)不同的方面：平衡短期利益與長期利益，自身利益與他人利益，同時(shí)考慮所有選項(xiàng)——或適應(yīng)現(xiàn)有環(huán)境，或試圖改變環(huán)境，或?qū)で笮碌木置妗?/p>

按照斯滕伯格的模式，你要記得判斷某一困境中所有各方不同的利益，包括短期利益和長期利益，同時(shí)留意不斷變化的環(huán)境，以及如何才能使環(huán)境符合自己的要求。

根據(jù)某一派有關(guān)智慧的學(xué)說，格羅斯曼在實(shí)驗(yàn)室里對不同策略加以試驗(yàn)。他讓人們設(shè)想自己像鳥兒般俯瞰事態(tài)全局，或者像墻上的蒼蠅一樣靜觀事態(tài)，籍此學(xué)會(huì)從不同視角看問題。這種想法意在使人們遠(yuǎn)離直接經(jīng)驗(yàn)，甚至站在第三者的角度對自己說話都能起到幫助作用。因此，在面對困境時(shí)，我應(yīng)該這樣問自己：克勞迪婭會(huì)怎么做？

除了以第三人稱對自己說話，我們有時(shí)還可以更進(jìn)一步，即直接詢問他人，看看他們認(rèn)為我們應(yīng)該怎么做。我們往往當(dāng)局者迷，旁觀者清。我尤其喜歡的一項(xiàng)關(guān)于時(shí)間認(rèn)知的研究涉及規(guī)劃謬誤，這是我們中的許多人都會(huì)犯的錯(cuò)誤——我們覺得自己能以比實(shí)際快得多的速度完成一項(xiàng)工作。不論是嘗試在一天內(nèi)重新裝修起居室，還是在一個(gè)晚上完成某項(xiàng)工作項(xiàng)目，當(dāng)我們完不成時(shí)，我們常常感到沮喪。我們往往認(rèn)為，以后我們會(huì)變得更有效率，所以會(huì)有更多的時(shí)間?？上У氖牵覀兓蛟S并不會(huì)。

不過，我們盡管不擅長評(píng)估自己的時(shí)間表，卻更擅長評(píng)估他人的時(shí)間表。某項(xiàng)研究要求學(xué)生分別估算自己及其他學(xué)生可能會(huì)在何時(shí)完成作業(yè)。相比于自己，他們更擅長估計(jì)他人的時(shí)間安排，因?yàn)樗麄儠?huì)考慮到一些不可預(yù)測的干擾性因素，比如感冒，或到家時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)洗衣機(jī)水淹廚房。而論及我們自己的生活時(shí)，我們天生樂觀的態(tài)度似乎會(huì)妨礙我們考慮一些可能出現(xiàn)的問題。

那么你打算成為智慧之人嗎？答案是肯定的，但也不要忘記諸多因素。你要考慮到，不論短期和長期，每個(gè)人都有不盡相同的目標(biāo)、重點(diǎn)和應(yīng)對方式。你如果能一一協(xié)調(diào)，或許就會(huì)展現(xiàn)出智慧。但我們也不應(yīng)因情況復(fù)雜而不去嘗試。就像格羅斯曼告訴我的那樣：“你當(dāng)然不會(huì)立馬成佛，但確實(shí)能變得稍微有點(diǎn)智慧?！?/p>

New Oriental English .

1. a whole lot of：許多

2. rumination [?ru?m??ne??（?）n] n. 深思熟慮；考慮成熟的意見

. New Oriental English

3. juggle [?d??ɡ（?）l] vt. 盡力同時(shí)應(yīng)對（兩種或兩種以上不同的活動(dòng)或人）

4. fallacy [?f?l?si] n. 謬誤

JOKE

Meet the Parents

A young man looking to get married asked his friend. “Every woman I bring home to meet my parents， my mother doesnt like.”

“Oh， thats easy，” his pal replied. “All you have to do is find someone who is just like your mother.”

“I did that already，” he said， “and that one my father didnt like.”