Wounded by wonder? Or by its absence?
Motivated by the majestic trio of knowledge, wisdom, and understanding, the philosopher is marked by the mental state of wonder. But Machiavelli and Marx suggest that he is wonder-wounded*; the former encourages ruling the world and the latter changing it. Both seem to rank action above understanding. Yet is not the man of mere action wounded by wonder’s absence? Does he not dehumanize by dismissing thought?
Perhaps there is a proper balance of contemplation and task, of philosophy and the doings of daily life. How strike the balance? That is a philosophical question requiring her methods, not those of the practical man.
*I borrow this language from Shakespeare (Hamlet, Act V, Scene 1, Line 257)