In my teaching, I’ve noted that a student’s intelligence does not necessarily correlate with his or her ability to solve physics problems. After getting a low grade on the first test in the class, a student might inform me that he gets straight A’s in his other classes and therefore, something must be wrong or unfair with how I’m testing or teaching the class. That’s the case even though the class average suggests otherwise. My physics colleagues have reported similar experiences, and usually the disgruntled student has indeed excelled in courses where the primary requirement is memorization of facts or perhaps personal or creative expression.

What, then, is the nature of the difficulty in physics? For starters, the answer is seldom if ever a matter of opinion, nor does the answer depend upon a simple statement of fact. An intelligent student, in preparing for a test, may memorize all the pertinent physics formulas or review her notes from the lectures. But something more is needed. 

Let’s say the student is faced with a test problem that asks her to calculate the orbital period of a satellite that’s moving in a circular orbit at a height above the Earth’s surface equal to the Earth’s radius. Various data may be given as well, such as the mass of the Earth, the mass of the satellite, the Earth’s radius, and the universal constant of gravitation.

Memorizing all the formulas presented in class or having them at hand on a formula sheet will not suffice, since the problem’s solution proceeds from understanding the relevant principles of how things work. For example, circular motion of a mass, m, such as a satellite, requires a centripetal force of a certain magnitude. The student then needs to realize that this centripetal force has to be provided by an external force, such as gravity. If she then equates the formula for the gravitational force to the expression for the centripetal force, then she’s on her way (after a couple more steps) to obtaining the satellite’s orbital period.

The insightful reader may realize that the answer to this problem (finding the orbital period) could cleverly be found in one step by applying a single formula — Newton’s version of Kepler’s third law of planetary motion, appropriately modified for an orbit around the Earth rather than the sun.¹

More than Knowledge

So, aside from reminding most people of why they don’t like physics, what is the point here? Looking at the words used to describe how to solve the problem suggests that something beyond knowledge is needed. Words such as understanding, realization, and insight are all part of the package needed to arrive at the correct solution.

The fine-tuning of the physical parameters, forces, and laws of nature — which govern the interaction of matter at all scales of existence, so that human life can flourish — could hardly have been established by a bottom-up approach. Arbitrarily assigning values to the physical parameters that determine a universe, and then having the outcome be congenial for life, would be hopelessly defeated by improbable odds.  Rather, a top-down methodology applied by a mind, exercising wisdom superior to our own and beginning with the desired ultimate purpose of sustaining human civilization, could conceivably succeed at designing a universe with the specific interdependent parameters needed to sustain life as we know it.

The attribute of wisdom includes understanding the appropriate interconnections between things — whether data points, facts, formulas, ideas, or physical entities. Consider the biochemistry of a living cell, where multiple complex biomolecules all play a part. While intelligence would definitely be needed to produce molecules such as these, wisdom is the prerequisite required to understand how to assemble them into a functional whole. Further understanding is needed to establish the essential interactions between the cell and its environment. With multicellular organisms, additional layers of wisdom are called for to create the cooperative relationships among individual cells so that the purpose of the whole organism is achieved.

Distinctions between a person guided by wisdom, and one who is not, are somewhat counterintuitive. The wise person doesn’t think he knows it all. He doesn’t rely only on his own conclusions, but instead is willing to express doubt and know when to ask for advice. The wisdom in our minds implies a source of wisdom that transcends our minds. 

In a similar vein, the intelligence of AI is dependent upon the intelligence of minds beyond itself. It’s instructive to consider whether an AI program can discern when it doesn’t really know the answer to a question (and acknowledge it) or whether it will exhibit foolishness by giving an answer that is at best nonsensical or at worst false. As Casey Luskin has written here:

An initial “generation” of AI is trained directly on human-created data and its output generally makes sense. But after multiple generations of AI training on itself, the result is gibberish. [Emphasis added.]

AI can only appear intelligent if it accesses knowledge and creativity beyond itself.  Artificial intelligence may be programmable, but is there such a thing as artificial wisdom?

Moral Wisdom

Wisdom is also needed to chart the path of justice. Intelligence may be able to identify the relevant facts of a case, but true justice often transcends a straightforward conclusion of intelligence. For example, a king may use intelligence to protect his throne, but how could intelligence focused on self-preservation understand that defending the rights of the poor ultimately leads to the stability of a kingdom? 

Judgments can be issued based on a simple knowledge of law, but how much intelligence is required to discern when mercy should triumph over judgment? Basing a judicial system on limited knowledge, or even upon the majority vote reflecting human opinions, is necessarily capricious and arbitrary. Handing over judicial authority to AI, devoid of wisdom, would elevate technology to tyranny.

Moral wisdom taps into standards of morality and justice that inform our conscience and correspond to standards shown to result in the freedom and flourishing of a nation. Darwinism, and its “nothing buttery” worldview, is a rancid alternative, off-gassing the notion that reality is merely materialistic.

The most tyrannical societies have also been the most atheistic, and the most likely to point to “science” as a justification on both counts.

Wisdom Sees More Than Materialism

Wisdom is understanding that there is more to reality than the surface appearance of things. The practical benefit of wisdom is a clue that our existence is embedded in something more than a system of random forces or quantum probabilities. The natural realm reserves its deepest secrets for those who are willing to consider that truth may be hidden beneath the bare objectivity of material mechanisms.

If physical desires, such as hunger, rightly indicate that we were meant to be satisfied with food, then the longing for something that transcends even our most lavish experiences of abundance must also indicate an attainable fulfillment we have never yet tasted and without which we cannot be fully satisfied.

Wisdom discerns that human life transcends even the physical death of our bodies, and that our existence is dependent upon a transcendental reality. The Judeo-Christian doctrine of the possibility of a continuation of our lives beyond the veiled covering of death has been complemented by in-depth studies of human near-death experiences. 

J. R. R. Tolkien, at the culmination of his epic Lord of the Rings, evocatively describes Frodo’s passage to the undying lands:

And the ship went out into the High Sea and passed on into the West, until at last on a night of rain Frodo smelled a sweet fragrance on the air and heard the sound of singing that came over the water. And then it seemed to him that as in his dream in the house of Bombadil, the grey rain-curtain turned all to silver glass and was rolled back, and he beheld white shores and beyond them a far green country under a swift sunrise.²

Wisdom itself, like design, is evidence of an intelligent and wise mind behind the universe. Apprehending wisdom gives far more benefit than just understanding how to solve physics problems. The author of the Book of Proverbs may have been alluding to these realities when he wrote that the beginning of wisdom is nothing else than the fear of the Lord.

Notes

1. The answer for the orbital period of the satellite comes out to be 239 minutes, or just under 4 hours.
2. J. R. R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, “The Grey Havens” (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1994), p. 1030.