Who is it we should seek to advise us?
Surely it would be those with knowledge.
And what of those with experience?
Beware those who advise from experience, for seldom have they learned correctly from such experiences and so seldom know the advice to give.
How do you mean?
Those with experience may not necessarily understand what they should have from such experiences. What of he who finds himself in relationship after relationship, one would say they are experienced in relationships, but should one take advise from such a person as to how to behave when in a relationship?
Only if one desires a plethora of relationships.
Exactly. And is it not true that most of us want one partner to please us and for us to please?
Then this proves that experience does not necessarily qualify one to advise.
But what of those who have done well, is it not that they have done well with the experience they had and in turn conjured good experiences?
This is true but still exercise prudence when accepting advise from such people. It may not be that they truly understand what has allowed for them to conjure such good experiences and advise to better the image of themselves in the eye of the people. Take he who has a natural ability to do something well, never would such a person attribute their success to their genetics, rather they would have you believe that they have worked hard for the success they have attained and so in the eyes of the people this is what you will believe. It is not so much about what it is that truly gave them the success, rather that they will not be honest about what did.
And be cautious of those who pass advice of the unsolicited kind. Such a person never advises for the good of those they are advising but again for the good of themselves. For they wish for those they advise to perceive them to be knowledgeable and wise for these are signs of virtue.
And what of those who gate keep such knowledge and make the means of obtaining such knowledge experience?
Such people are often mistaken and undermine the theory of teaching.
Is it not that we teach for the sake of protection of poor experiences?
How do you mean?
Is it not that your parents warn you from that which can do you harm such as drugs?
And is it that you must do drugs and experience the pernicious effects of having done them to know not to engage in such things?
No of course not.
And so, then experience is not necessary for all faculties of knowledge. Often such people who advocate such a message wish to be seen as special for having been subject to such experiences. If it is the case that the experience was not necessary to have such knowledge such a person suddenly feels as though their experience is now redundant.
Always beware of such people who show clear signs of the need to be seen as special. Often, they are disingenuous in how they advise. Rarely do they truly know of that which they speak and are nothing more than ultracrepidarians. Such people reiterate the messages they have heard receive most praise and they themselves will repeat such messages to receive such praise for themselves.
And what of those who advise but do not do as they themselves advise?
You mean the hypocrite?
Often the advice of a hypocrite will be a correct one for they will be bound to advise the truth to be seen as a man of knowledge. But they will lack the strength of character to behave accordingly.
Truly the hypocrite is the saddest amongst us. What a life to live, with knowledge of the truth but the absence of character to live by it.