wisdom evidently means never equivocating on anything. You can only get a 5.0 on the test if you choose the "correct" "Strongly agree" or "Strongly disagree." Contrary to my own understanding of wisdom, one needs to be self aware enough of one's wisdom to make decisive, unequivocal choices. Being able to live with them and take responsibility for them are also pretty typical as are listening to others, caring about their feelings and the feelings of animals, wanting to know why an answer is true, and generally liking people enough to not want to see them hurt or have them go away...these seem to be something directly out of the DSM, i.e. they aren't about wisdom but about how well socialized you are (though even this is upset by the fact that, as Freud begins his "Civilization and Its Discontents" "There are a few men from whom their contemporaries do not withhold admiration, although their greatness rests on attributes and achievements which are completely foreign to the aims and ideals of the multitude.") And if it is basically judging how well you fit the profile of being normal and well adjusted, the wise person would actually only be the rare individual that complied with all the assumptions of the analysts about what it meant to be normal. In other words, to give this kind of individual a superlative status in terms of "wisdom" seems to undermine the whole concept of the norm.
Perhaps all this was completely obvious to others (or completely wrong) but, since I'm not wise enough to go to bed at a decent hour, the concept happened to keep the hamster on the wheel for a few minutes longer than was probably necessary. I aim to repair that.
s