7. Wisdom as Contemplative, Liberal, and Divine Knowledge

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Philosophy Begins in Wonder, Not Necessity #

• The philomuthos (lover of myths/stories) and the philosopher both pursue knowledge for its own sake
• Unlike practical knowledge (which serves making or doing), wisdom arises from wonder about causes
• The love of stories, like reading novels or watching movies beyond bedtime, demonstrates knowledge pursued without practical utility
• Homer’s epics (Iliad and Odyssey) precede Greek philosophy by approximately 150 years and prepare the way for philosophical wonder by arousing wonder in the philomuthos
• The philomuthos serves as a “stepping stone” to the philosopher; one must be a lover of stories before becoming a philosopher

The Necessity Condition: Bodily Needs Must Be Satisfied #

• Philosophy only emerges when necessities of life (food, clothing, shelter) AND some recreation/amusement are secured
• A hungry or cold man cannot philosophize; he must pursue practical knowledge for survival
• Historical evidence: Berquist’s grandfather (blacksmith in Minnesota) had no time for philosophy; his father worked his way through high school and college; only when necessities were provided could the three sons pursue philosophy
• This demonstrates philosophy is not motivated by practical need but by the freedom necessities provide

Poetry Captures Universal, Not Particular Knowledge #

• Aristotle argues that great fiction is more about the universal than the singular
• Romeo and Juliet: The historical particular (two lovers in 14th-century Verona) is less important than the universal (young lovers separated by circumstance)
• The Greek chorus in tragedy (e.g., Sophocles’ Oedipus) speaks to “generations of men,” revealing universal human conditions rather than particular historical facts
• Shakespeare’s Sonnets express universal human experiences through particular situations; theories about Shakespeare’s specific biographical circumstances miss the universal meaning
• History concerns itself with the singular; poetry with the universal—making poetry more philosophic than history

Liberal versus Servile Knowledge #

• Liberal knowledge (from liber, free): Knowledge pursued for its own sake, for the good of the mind itself
• Servile knowledge: Knowledge pursued for the sake of something else—bodily needs, possessions, external goods
• The distinction derives from analogy to free men (existing for themselves) versus slaves (existing for their master)
• Wisdom alone is fully liberal knowledge because it is pursued purely for understanding
• Lesser sciences are studied for the sake of higher sciences (e.g., studying the body for the soul, the soul for angels, angels for God), but wisdom about God is pursued as an end in itself

Wisdom as Divine Knowledge #

• Wisdom is divine in two senses:
  • Object: It is knowledge of God (the first cause)
  • Subject: It is the knowledge that God most of all would possess
• Since God is the first cause and the most honorable reality, wisdom—as knowledge of God—must be the most honorable knowledge
• The divine is not envious of human pursuit of wisdom (contra Simonides) because envy is a form of sadness, which cannot affect God; God cannot mistake our participation in his goodness for a diminishment of his own

The Problem of Human Enslavement #

• Man is enslaved in multiple ways:
  • To bodily needs (hunger, thirst, cold, sleep)
  • To external possessions (house, car, family obligations)
  • To his passions (anger, drunkenness, lust, envy)
  • To customs, fashion, and error
• Unlike the free man who exists for himself, enslaved man cannot pursue wisdom whenever he wishes
• One cannot philosophize while defending one’s country in battle, for example
• This explains why wisdom seems “not a human position” (οὐ θνητὸν εἶναι) and belongs more to God than to man
• The poet Simonides suggests: “This belongs to God, not to man”

Key Arguments #

From Wonder to Contemplative Knowledge #

• Philosophy begins not from practical need (hunger, thirst, desire for health) but from wonder (thaumazein)
• The philomuthos wonders at stories without seeking practical benefit
• Therefore, the knowledge philosophy pursues is not practical but contemplative (theoria)
• Wisdom is that knowledge which arises from wonder and is pursued for its own sake

From Wonder to Liberal Knowledge #

• Since wisdom arises from wonder (desire to know) rather than necessity, it is not pursued for external utility
• Knowledge pursued for external utility serves something other than itself (servile knowledge)
• Wisdom serves nothing beyond itself; it is pursued purely for understanding
• Therefore, wisdom is liberal knowledge

From Enslavement to the Divine Nature of Wisdom #

• Man is enslaved to bodily needs and cannot pursue wisdom whenever he wishes
• Therefore, wisdom does not fit the human condition in an unqualified way
• Wisdom belongs more to the divine than to the human
• The most divine knowledge is the most honorable
• Therefore, wisdom is the most honorable knowledge

Important Definitions #

Wisdom (σοφία, sophia): Contemplative knowledge of the first cause pursued for its own sake; the most divine and honorable knowledge because it is knowledge of God and the knowledge God most perfectly possesses.

Philomuthos (φιλόμυθος): A lover of myths or stories; one who pursues knowledge of narratives for their own sake, aroused by wonder at universal human conditions depicted in stories; a stepping stone to becoming a philosopher.

Wonder (θαυμάζειν, thaumazein): The desire to know causes; the motivation for philosophy distinct from practical necessity; what arises when one encounters the unexpected or seeks understanding for its own sake.

Liberal knowledge (ἐλευθέριος, eleuthérios): Knowledge pursued for the good of the mind itself, for its own sake; distinguished from servile knowledge by analogy to free persons (existing for themselves) versus slaves (existing for another).

Servile knowledge: Knowledge pursued for the sake of something other than understanding itself—bodily needs, external goods, or practical utility.

Contemplative knowledge (theoria): Knowledge pursued for understanding itself, distinct from practical knowledge (praxis) which serves making or doing.

Examples & Illustrations #

The Philomuthos and the Novelist #

• A person reading a novel late into the night, sacrificing sleep needed for work the next day, demonstrates that knowledge is pursued without practical benefit
• The reader wonders what will happen to Little Red Riding Hood, not to acquire knowledge useful for making or doing something
• This parallels the philosopher’s wonder, which seeks understanding for its own sake

Romeo and Juliet #

• The historical particular: two lovers in 14th-century Verona (whether they actually existed is beside the point)
• The universal meaning: young lovers separated by circumstance and familial conflict
• When we watch the play, we see the universal human condition, not the historical singularity
• This shows that great fiction reveals universals in particular narratives, making it more philosophical than history

Sophocles and the Universality of Tragedy #

• In Oedipus, when Oedipus falls from grace, the chorus does not cry “O Oedipus!” but “O generations of men!”
• The tragedy reveals something universal about the human condition, not merely about one man’s misfortune
• This universality makes tragedy more philosophic than historical narrative

The Progression from Blacksmith to Philosopher #

• Grandfather (blacksmith in Parkes Prairie, Minnesota): Immigrated at age 15; worked hard daily; had no time for philosophy; enslaved to labor
• Father (son of blacksmith): Worked through high school in Alexandria, Minnesota; slept in a factory; gradually improved circumstances; became manager and business owner
• Three sons: Once necessities of life and some recreation were provided, all three became philosophers
• This family history demonstrates Aristotle’s principle that philosophy requires freedom from pressing bodily needs

The Pedagogical Progression (The Dinner Party) #

• First room: Good food and wine (necessities and recreation satisfied)
• Second room: Mozart (aesthetic appreciation)
• Third room: Beautiful bound editions of Shakespeare, Homer, and Sophocles (great literature)
• Fourth room: Philosophy itself
• Shows gradual ascent from bodily to intellectual pursuits; not all proceed to each stage

Historical Evidence from Great Philosophers #

• Plato: In the Republic, affirms that Homer above all poets arouses wonder; Plato himself has poetic appreciation
• Aristotle: Wrote Poetics analyzing poetry; composed a work on Homer for Alexander the Great; Alexander kept Homer at his bedside
• Both great philosophers retained the wonder of the philomuthos; none became philosophers without first being lovers of stories

Pythagoras and the Origin of “Philosopher” #

• Contemporaries called Pythagoras “wise” in recognition of his mathematical discoveries
• Pythagoras corrected them: “Do not call me wise; God alone is wise”
• When asked what to call him instead, Pythagoras replied: “Call me a philosopher—a lover of wisdom”
• This etymology shows that the name “philosopher” embodies humility: admitting that man’s wisdom, if he has any, is vastly inferior to God’s

Notable Quotes #

“This belongs to God, not to man.” — Simonides (cited by Aristotle)

“In many ways, the nature of man is enslaved.” — Aristotle (as quoted by Berquist)

“Do not call me wise. God alone is wise. Call me a lover of wisdom.” — Pythagoras

“Poetry is more philosophical than history.” — Aristotle (paraphrased in lecture)

“Man, however, is not worthy to seek knowledge for itself.” — Simonides (as cited by Aristotle)

Questions Addressed #

Why does the philomuthos (lover of stories) resemble the philosopher? #

Both pursue knowledge for its own sake, aroused by wonder. The philomuthos wonders at narratives depicting universal human conditions; the philosopher wonders about causes and first principles. Wonder in both cases is not motivated by practical need but by desire to know.

How can philosophy begin in wonder if men are initially enslaved to bodily needs? #

Philosophy emerges only after necessities of life are secured and some recreation is provided. The historical fact that men enslaved to survival do not philosophize proves that philosophy is not motivated by practical need. Once freed from pressing bodily concerns, men begin to wonder for its own sake.

In what sense is wisdom “liberal” or “free” knowledge? #

Wisdom is pursued for its own sake (for the good of the mind), not for external utility or bodily benefit. This parallels the freedom of a free man who exists for himself, as opposed to a slave who exists for another. Wisdom serves nothing beyond itself; it is an end in itself.

Why does wisdom seem “not a human position”? #

Man is enslaved to bodily needs, external possessions, passions, and customs in ways that prevent him from pursuing wisdom whenever he wishes. Unlike a free man, man cannot simply choose to philosophize; he must first eat, sleep, earn money, care for family. This fundamental enslavement shows wisdom belongs more to the divine (free from all necessity) than to the human.

How can wisdom be both about universals and about the first cause? #

These are two different senses of “common.” Wisdom knows universals (what is said of all things) through knowing causes. The first cause, being the source of all things, is what is most universal in the sense of being the cause of all.

Is the divine envious of human pursuit of wisdom? #

No. Envy is a form of sadness, and nothing bad can happen to God. Moreover, the envious person mistakenly thinks another’s good diminishes his own. God could never make this mistake regarding wisdom we participate in from him. God cannot be envious.