This definition is laudable in many waysit casts a distinctively social lens upon wisdom, arguing that to be wise is to consider and at balance the common good against selfinterest. It requires that such consideration be excellent, which presumably allows for measurable, “gold standard” processes and outcomes. It also proposes that metacognition is a hallmark of wise reasoning (perspectival meta-cognition or PMC) – a wise person must consider the adequacy of their reasoning when considering socially-relevant problems. Together, these criteria provide a basis for cross-disciplinary wisdom research, as it might be possible to both assess and train wisdom with these concrete markers in mind. While a strong case is made for wisdom’s central constructs, the mechanisms by which these qualities may be improved are relatively sparse. As noted in the target article, national educational systems rarely formally teach or evaluate wisdom, despite it being a valued educational outcome (Ferrari & Kim, 2019). To move forward, the target paper suggests a focus on training subcomponents of wisdom such as morality and PMC. However, only training for PMC is discussed, with the examples of mindfulness meditation training and illeist (third-person) writing exercises introduced as candidates PMC interventions. Yet the discussion on how to train morality or social engagement is relatively underspecified. The purpose of my commentary is to suggest that the research community actually knows a lot about wisdom cultivation, including the cultivation of social responsibility. Specifically, large research literatures on the cultivation of wisdom can be found in both contemplative traditions (including mindfulness training) and in modern clinical psychology. Inclusion of these literatures is important for addressing gaps in the wisdom model for how to translate PMC into a socially engaged, moral domain.

中文翻译：

---

用心元认知：正念、治疗与智慧的培养

这个定义在很多方面都值得称赞，它以独特的社会视角看待智慧，认为明智是考虑并平衡公共利益与自身利益。它要求这种考虑非常出色，这大概允许可衡量的“黄金标准”流程和结果。它还提出元认知是明智推理（透视元认知或 PMC）的标志——一个明智的人在考虑与社会相关的问题时必须考虑他们推理的充分性。总之，这些标准为跨学科的智慧研究提供了基础，因为有可能在考虑到这些具体标记的情况下评估和训练智慧。虽然智慧的核心结构有充分的理由，但改善这些品质的机制却相对较少。正如目标文章中所述，尽管智慧是一种有价值的教育成果，但国家教育系统很少正式教授或评估智慧（Ferrari & Kim，2019）。为了向前迈进，目标论文建议将重点放在培养智慧的子组成部分，例如道德和 PMC。然而，只讨论了 PMC 的培训，并引入了正念冥想培训和 illeist（第三人称）写作练习的例子作为 PMC 的候选干预措施。然而，关于如何培养道德或社会参与的讨论相对而言还不够具体。我的评论的目的是表明研究界实际上对智慧的培养有很多了解，包括社会责任的培养。具体来说，在沉思传统（包括正念训练）和现代临床心理学中都可以找到关于智慧培养的大量研究文献。包含这些文献对于解决如何将 PMC 转化为社会参与的道德领域的智慧模型中的差距很重要。