This is an interesting observation.
The thing about "the wisdom of uncertainty" would be that it might give understaning, but that understanding is had only in contemplation and paralysis. Decision is necessary for action. Without out action, there is no changing the world.
You can't _do_ anything with the wisdom of uncertainty, but sit in contemplative brilliance. The W of U seems to be for life's spectators.
Of course, sometimes the best thing is to "not just do something, but stand there."
Charles
^^^^^
Thomas Seay
Since Wojtek mentioned Kundera in relation to this thread yesterday, I thought I would quote Kundera on this very subject, since he expresses himself better what my point was. This is from his essay on Cervantes in "The Art of the Novel" (actually I only have the French version, so the following is my on-the-fly translation)
<<Man desires a world in which Good and Evil are clearly discernible, as humans have an innate and uncontrollable desire to judge rather than understand. Religions and ideologies are founded on this desire. They [religions and ideologies] can reconcile themselves wih the novel only by translating the latter's language of relativity and amiguity into their apodictic and dogmatic verbiage. Religion and ideologie require that someone is right; either Anna Karenina is the victim of a narrow-minded despot or Mr. Karenina is the victim of an immoral woman. Either K is innocent and been crushed by an unjust court or the court is an expression of divine justice and K. is guilty.>>
<<In this 'Either/Or ' resides the incapacity to bear the essential relativity of all things human, the incapacity to face up to the absence of a Supreme Judge. Due to this incapacity, the novel's wisdom (the wisdom of uncertainty) is difficult to accept and understand.>>