wisdom are urgently needed so that the integrating sciences can learn a lesson how
to foster healthy change, driven by wisdom inquiry (Maxwell 2010; Pandit 2007a,
b, 2008, 2010b, c, 2012b).
In the preceding discussion, I have indicated how important it is to move from
the convergence model to the rationality of knowledge resources dynamics that
might help humanity to hammer out rational and wise solutions to global challenges. Should such a development take place in the next 20–50 years, the wisdom
of culture that had originated in ancient philosophical texts, compositions and
world-views might have a chance to come back to life in the culture of wisdom, as it
were, completing the wisdom circle for the sciences. In final analysis, however, it
seems that in moving from convergence to the rationality of knowledge resources
dynamics, we are still moving from the wisdom of culture to the culture of wisdom.
By ‘culture of wisdom’ I am referring to a knowledge environment in the universities and research institutions that is nurtured by local interactions, strongly
fostering linkaÊges between ecology, culture, discovery, innovation, ethics, wisdom inquiry and entrepreneurship in the service of humanity, human well-being,
biodiversity, ecosystem resilience and environmental justice.
While sounding optimistic, such an approach receives considerable support from
the unexpected quarters, namely, ethics and wisdom inquiry (Maxwell 2010; Pandit
2007a, b, 2008, 2010b, c, 2012b) that have emerged on the humanity’s intellectual
horizon for steering it through the twenty-first century towards its future goals. To put
it in a nutshell, wisdom inquiry tests the sciences not by their power to produce
knowledge but by their promise for interface-building so as to hammer out rational
and wise solutions to problems of living in a world that is witnessing accelerated risk
and environmental injustice. The rationality of sustainable development teaches all of
us how humanity might learn to work with, and not against, our planet; how it might
learn to cultivate and inculcate a new culture of wisdom and the values of intergenerational equity.
References
A New Biology for the 21st Century, National Academy of Sciences. (2009). http://www.nap.edu/
catalog/12764.html
Allen, G. (1978). Life Sciences in the twentieth century. London/New York/Melbourne: The
Cambridge History of Sciences Series, Cambridge University Press. 1978.
Allen, B. (1990). Information as an economic commodity. American Economic Review, 80(2),
268–273.
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. (2004). Impacts of a warming arctic: Arctic climate impact
assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berkman, P. A. & Young, O. R. (April 17, 2009). Governance and environmental change in the
Arctic ocean. Science, 324, 339–340.
Bigirimana, S. (2011). Patterns of human knowing in the information society: A philosophical
study of the epistemological implications of the information revolution. A Thesis Presented to
the Department of Philosophy Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg in Partial Fulfilment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, May 2011, Supervisor: Prof. Dr.
Peter McLaughlin (citing Pandit 1991).
156
G.L. Pandit
to foster healthy change, driven by wisdom inquiry (Maxwell 2010; Pandit 2007a,
b, 2008, 2010b, c, 2012b).
In the preceding discussion, I have indicated how important it is to move from
the convergence model to the rationality of knowledge resources dynamics that
might help humanity to hammer out rational and wise solutions to global challenges. Should such a development take place in the next 20–50 years, the wisdom
of culture that had originated in ancient philosophical texts, compositions and
world-views might have a chance to come back to life in the culture of wisdom, as it
were, completing the wisdom circle for the sciences. In final analysis, however, it
seems that in moving from convergence to the rationality of knowledge resources
dynamics, we are still moving from the wisdom of culture to the culture of wisdom.
By ‘culture of wisdom’ I am referring to a knowledge environment in the universities and research institutions that is nurtured by local interactions, strongly
fostering linkaÊges between ecology, culture, discovery, innovation, ethics, wisdom inquiry and entrepreneurship in the service of humanity, human well-being,
biodiversity, ecosystem resilience and environmental justice.
While sounding optimistic, such an approach receives considerable support from
the unexpected quarters, namely, ethics and wisdom inquiry (Maxwell 2010; Pandit
2007a, b, 2008, 2010b, c, 2012b) that have emerged on the humanity’s intellectual
horizon for steering it through the twenty-first century towards its future goals. To put
it in a nutshell, wisdom inquiry tests the sciences not by their power to produce
knowledge but by their promise for interface-building so as to hammer out rational
and wise solutions to problems of living in a world that is witnessing accelerated risk
and environmental injustice. The rationality of sustainable development teaches all of
us how humanity might learn to work with, and not against, our planet; how it might
learn to cultivate and inculcate a new culture of wisdom and the values of intergenerational equity.
References
A New Biology for the 21st Century, National Academy of Sciences. (2009). http://www.nap.edu/
catalog/12764.html
Allen, G. (1978). Life Sciences in the twentieth century. London/New York/Melbourne: The
Cambridge History of Sciences Series, Cambridge University Press. 1978.
Allen, B. (1990). Information as an economic commodity. American Economic Review, 80(2),
268–273.
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. (2004). Impacts of a warming arctic: Arctic climate impact
assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berkman, P. A. & Young, O. R. (April 17, 2009). Governance and environmental change in the
Arctic ocean. Science, 324, 339–340.
Bigirimana, S. (2011). Patterns of human knowing in the information society: A philosophical
study of the epistemological implications of the information revolution. A Thesis Presented to
the Department of Philosophy Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg in Partial Fulfilment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, May 2011, Supervisor: Prof. Dr.
Peter McLaughlin (citing Pandit 1991).
156
G.L. Pandit