In principle I'm opposed to all these sorts of tests, IQ, MMPI, Myers-Briggs, what have you. Human personality and intelligence are too complex to be reduced to a simple metric. The guy who struggles to read the newspaper could be an excellent woodworker. The person who is diagnosed as a borderline personality type could write searingly beautiful poetry. So what kind of world are we living in where a single diagnostic description of a person's mental state counts for more than what that person is capable of producing?

It's bureaucratic fascism, plain and simple.

But then, I'm just a "4", so what do I know?

Three. I revel in my idiotic superiority.

3.3. I have relatively moderate wisdom. So if you ask me something deep, ignore most of what I say.

I took the test four times. On my first pass , I answered sincerely and scored a 3.7. On the second pass, I always chose the middle answer and scored a 3. On the third pass, I always chose the first answer and scored a 1.9. On the fourth pass, I always chose the last answer, and scored a 4.1.

So, it seems I'm most wise when I'm strongly disagreeing and asserting that things aren't true of me.

Apparently, wisdom is about caring deeply about and getting along with all other people! All the time! And feeling really good about yourself!

I couldn't agree with you more. This test is total horseshit.

Funny thing is, as I've gotten older, I've had insights about life that are polar opposites of the conclusions drawn by this lame-o test, namely:

My emotional resources are finite, so I'm not really able to take all the world's problems on my shoulders or care about the entire human race.

I am a unique person, with unique likes and dislikes; this means that some people are very different from me and I am very different from them. I'm not necessarily going to love everyone I meet.

Sometimes, life just sucks. Feeling bad when things suck is normal. Wallowing in those bad feelings is unhealthy, but so is putting on a big fake smile and pretending everything is A-OK.

This isn't a wisdom test. It's a nicey-nicey test. And life isn't always nice. Truly wise people recognize this.

3.9

I feel quietly smug about being a tenth of a point from relatively high wisdom. I feel that the other bunnies can suck it.


And yeah, for the nytimes, a pretty lame quiz.

I've heard of plenty of crazier projects that have received funding. I'm ambivalent about this "Wisdom Study."

I scored a 4.1

2.9! People suck! I hate you all! And I'm right, goddammit, RIGHT!

A 3.8, and I definitely do not feel in any way superior wisdom-wise (ha!).

nthed, that this test tells you nothing useful

3.2, but 29 or so of my answers were neutral since that answer is closest to Not Applicable.

I was very frustrated with the wording of many of the questions and answered "about halfway true" or "neutral" for many of those, scoring 3.2.

"When I think back on what has happened to me, I often feel resentful."

Resentful of whom? What if I mostly turn that anger inward? I sure resent the past me a lot of the time. Yet at the same time I wouldn't say I feel "cheated", even by myself.

Similarly, shouldn't I admit that I find other people annoying and don't want to listen to their problems? Isn't it healthier to have that knowledge about yourself? If the question were

"I wish that I would listen to other people's problems more, because I could learn something about myself" then I'd wholeheartedly agree and feel that this represented some metric of "wisdom", at least the received variety.

Anyway, The Older and Wiser Hypothesis appears to be the article to which this is a sidebar. Reg req'd. Ardelt's research seems to equate "wisdom" with "emotional resiliency" and being able to rebound from setbacks or handle adversity. Defined that way, I'm a little more assured that I'm average.