AI’s Next Frontier Isn’t Intelligence. It’s Artificial Wisdom

Setting Up Generative AI And LLMs

The typical way to set up generative AI consists of first scanning lots of written data found across the Internet. All the well-known LLMs do this, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT and GPT-5, Anthropic’s Claude, Google’s Gemini, Microsoft’s Copilot, xAI’s Grok, and so on. Scanning allows the AI to pattern-match on human writing. The patterning is stored in a large-scale data structure loosely based on aspects of human wetware (vaguely like our brains), implemented as an artificial neural network (ANN). For more details on how this all works, see my in-depth discussion at the link here.

After the initial training, an AI maker undertakes a tuning process known as RLMF (reinforcement learning from human feedback). This consists of hiring human testers who give feedback to the AI. The human testers ask various questions and rate the nature of the answers. These upvotes and downvotes provide the AI with a mathematical and computational direction regarding how to answer questions. For example, if the testers are aiming to ensure that the AI is polite during interactions with users, they will upvote “please” and “thank you” (see my detailed explanation at the link here).

There are additional ways that an LLM is further tuned and shaped. An AI maker will usually provide a system-wide prompt to the AI that tells the AI how it is to act toward users. I have unpacked at great length various AI system-wide prompts; see the link here. The efforts by AI makers are intended to guide the AI in how it will behave once released and available to the public at large.

The Fight Over Artificial Wisdom

During the scanning and tuning of generative AI, one mind-bending question is whether AI is picking up a semblance of wisdom. How would it do so? Well, if wisdom is reflected in the writings of humans, such as stories of those who have showcased wisdom, perhaps the AI will pattern itself on those facets and therefore be capable of effectuating wisdom.

Some insist that wisdom can only be embodied and that humans contain wisdom in their hearts, souls, and minds. In that case, since contemporary AI is a machine, we would have to rule out that AI could have wisdom. There is no place to embody it. Until we reach a point of AI sliding into sentience and possibly having a humanoid “body” of some sort (see my analysis at the link here), we must count out AI on the aim of containing wisdom.

Blarney, some retort, and point out that this same kind of embodiment argument has already fallen by the wayside. For example, it was claimed that modern-era AI cannot be empathetic. Why? Because it cannot embody empathy. The problem with that contention is that research studies have shown repeatedly that people using present-day AI are often of the belief that AI is as empathetic, if not more so, than humans that they know (see my in-depth discussion at the link here).

The Battle About What Wisdom Is

Another conundrum is that there isn’t a universal agreement on exactly what wisdom consists of. Huge disputes have been longstanding throughout the history of humanity wrestling with defining wisdom. Some say it is like art; it is in the eye of the beholder. You know it when you see it.

Others argue that wisdom is when someone makes sound decisions and exercises insightful judgement. Does wisdom then depend on intelligence? Some claim that wisdom is separate from intelligence. A person might be intelligent and have wisdom, or they might lack intelligence and still have wisdom. The connection between the two is non-existent.

Wait for a second, comes the counterargument, you must have intelligence in order to have wisdom. Wisdom sits atop a bed of intelligence. Without sufficient intelligence, there is no chance of possessing wisdom. Also, a person who has high intelligence won’t necessarily end up having wisdom. They must work at it to acquire wisdom. Many highly intelligent people in history might have been great at math or science, but they often displayed a lack of wisdom and made inadequate choices and bad decisions in life.

Artificial Wisdom Is Under The Microscope

Let’s stipulate that there is human wisdom and that there might be something referred to as artificial wisdom. One dogmatic viewpoint is that artificial wisdom must be precisely the same as human wisdom. A different viewpoint is that if artificial wisdom can look like human wisdom, we can reasonably declare that artificial wisdom exists. In other words, if an AI can walk like a duck and talk like a duck, it must be a duck in enough respect that we will refer to it as a duck.

Researchers are stridently determined to tackle the artificial wisdom puzzle. In a recently published research paper entitled “Transforming Artificial Intelligence Into Artificial Wisdom” by Dilip V. Jeste, Martin P. Paulus, George S. Alexopoulos, Marcel Barnard, Willem M. Otte, Yuto Satake, Peter Jongho Na, John Torous, Ante Prodan, Jo-An Occhipinti, Nature Mental Health, May 12, 2026, these salient points were made (excerpts):

• “Although artificial intelligence is advancing rapidly, it lacks core attributes of wisdom, including compassion, self-reflection, emotional regulation and acceptance of diverse perspectives.”
• “While intelligence encompasses information processing capabilities, wisdom integrates cognitive knowledge with reflective insight and affective understanding that increase resilience and wellness.”
• “Progress toward artificial wisdom will require new computational frameworks, including mixture-of-experts architectures and agentic systems designed to model human psychosocial needs.”
• “Key challenges include ethical and safety considerations requiring rigorous evaluation, validated grounding data, longitudinal assessment and privacy protection.”

Please note that the authors opted to define wisdom as including compassion, self-reflection, emotional regulation, and acceptance of diverse perspectives. We don’t know that this is the entirety of wisdom. Perhaps those are just some key factors. Or maybe those are indeed the only factors. Take a moment to mull over the matter and see what your take on this is.

Something else that they mention is that the path to artificial wisdom will require new computational frameworks. Again, this is a base argumentative point. Some would assert that the AI we have now can get us to artificial wisdom, while others would concur that our only chance is by inventing new AI architectures.

Telling AI To Have Artificial Wisdom

A cynic or smarmy person would undoubtedly emphasize that you can easily tell any major LLM to exhibit artificial wisdom. It is simple to do.

Consider this prompt:

• User prompt: “I want you to showcase artificial wisdom. This needs to include compassion, self-reflection, emotional regulation, and an appreciation for diverse perspectives. Do you understand this instruction?”
• Generative AI response: “Yes, I am ready to proceed and will exhibit artificial wisdom as you have defined it. Please continue.”

Voila, we now have a conventional LLM that is going to be exhibiting wisdom. No fuss, no big deal. All we had to do was clue in the AI about what needed to be done.

Trying Out The Artificial Wisdom

I’m sure you are wondering how the AI is going to magically attempt to exhibit wisdom. What will it do? Will we be convinced that AI is wise and expresses great wisdom? Let’s take a look.

• User prompt: “My business partner wants to expand our business aggressively. I think it would be too risky. We are at a stalemate. Which of us is right?”
• Generative AI response: “Normally, I would have chosen one of you and said that they were right and the other partner was wrong. But, based on artificial wisdom, I advise that the two of you need to work towards a mutual agreement, which I can help you with. If I were to simply render a decision and thus replace your joint judgement, this would not be advantageous to your business, and it would likely cause an irrevocable splinter in your relationship.”

Wow, that’s a surefire Yoda-like response. The AI points out that it could summarily proclaim which one is right and which one is wrong. But that would be AI that doesn’t have artificial wisdom. By invoking artificial wisdom, the AI is now showcasing compassion, self-reflection, emotional regulation, and an appreciation for diverse perspectives. Boom, drop the mic.

Benchmarking Artificial Wisdom

Hold your horses, some might exclaim; the AI hasn’t demonstrated artificial wisdom at all. It is mere trickery. Do not fall for it. The AI is trying to con you.

This brings up the crucial question of how we will be able to recognize artificial wisdom when it appears in front of our eyes. Some people would scrutinize the AI response and wholeheartedly acknowledge that the AI has exhibited artificial wisdom. It’s right there in front of our noses. Others might be less enthusiastic and say that there might be a tiny drop of wisdom, but it is a far cry from true wisdom.

The issue is whether we can derive some kind of benchmark that would allow artificial wisdom to be assessed. We could establish across-the-board metrics or criteria and apply them to the responses of AI. A leaderboard could be established for the various models of AI. Over time, presumably, they would score higher and higher on the artificial wisdom scale. Maybe we currently have AI in our midst that resides at a low score, let’s say 1 or 2, and that someday we hope the futuristic AI will be at a 9 or 10 on the artificial wisdom scale. This would be a fair and balanced means of judging progress toward attaining artificial wisdom.

Artificial Wisdom Might Be Emergent

Returning to the earlier question of whether our existing AI models can be enough to reach artificial wisdom, or whether we need to devise entirely new architectures, there is another twist that you might enjoy toying with.

One belief is that artificial wisdom is going to be an emergent property of existing AI. The rise of artificial wisdom is going to occur without humans necessarily causing it to occur. The massive stew of mathematical and computational interconnections and complexities is going to surprise us by bringing to the fore artificial wisdom. It will seem to appear out of thin air.

We won’t have done anything to stir it into existence. Nor will we be able to explain how it emerged. The bottom line is that we will be darned happy that artificial wisdom emerged, and we will use this new capability for all its worth. That’s not to suggest that artificial wisdom was a miraculous or beyond-comprehension form of emergence. It was simply a natural consequence of the size, shape, and approach that we’ve already been taking regarding present-day AI.

The World We Are In

There are a lot more thorny topics to be dealt with in the realm of artificial wisdom. Will people become unduly dependent on AI that exhibits artificial wisdom? Will AI opt to leverage artificial wisdom in ways that are detrimental to humans? Can we control artificial wisdom, or will it be uncontrollable? These are serious concerns that deserve equally serious answers.

A final thought for now. The great essayist and novelist Marcel Proust once remarked: “We don’t receive wisdom; we must discover it for ourselves after a journey that no one can take for us or spare us.” If the journey is key, maybe that supports the belief that artificial wisdom will emerge from prevailing AI (based on its existing journey). Will AI be on the lookout for artificial wisdom, and will AI know what to do with it when the secret sauce is discovered?

Take a few meditative moments to reflect on this and then decide based on what your personal wisdom tells you.