How does one obtain wisdom and experience without aging?

Once upon a time, our elders were revered. They were the sage teachers of the community, respected for their knowledge that they passed on to the next generation. In the absence of modern communication methods, elders were looked to for life instruction based on what they learned through their years. The longer they lived, the more they learned, the more they knew.

Modern society in America has relegated wisdom and experience to tiny rooms in nursing homes, assuming that the progression of chronological age automatically means the digression of mental age. The body may slow, but the slowing of the mind is not necessarily tightly tethered to the rate of bodily aging.

A slow gate or a stumble does not necessarily indicate a failing mind. We have had U.S. presidents in the past whose physical capabilities were severely limited, but who had great leadership ability; notably Franklin Delano Roosevelt who spent years in a wheelchair, and John F. Kennedy, who suffered from Addison’s disease which caused severe back pain and put him on crutches much of the time. Bodily frailties come with aging, but those frailties should not be the measure of mental capacity or the ability to lead.

Much more important than age, when determining leadership qualities, are things like character, empathy, experience, education, good judgment, sound decision-making, and the amount of intelligence one is blessed with initially.

Yes, we are now faced with a presidential election with a choice between an octogenarian and a soon-to-be octogenarian. To me, any consideration based on a candidate’s age is therefore canceled out. We must look at the other attributes. And I mean the actual, proven ones, not like the fabricated accusations per one Alexander Smirnov that are drummed up to undermine reality. One has been investigated vigorously with no substantiated evidence of wrongdoing. The other is facing 91 felony counts.

We have a candidate who has already received a majority of the popular vote to win a term as president; and one who won via the convolutions of the electoral college and who tried every scheme he possibly could to steal the next election from the rightful winner. He is currently under indictment for those machinations among other things. He is in trouble for breaking real, existing laws, not products of some opponent’s imagination. These laws were firmly established and pertain to all equally; they can hardly be characterized as a witch-hunt.

Someone with better than average wealth and the ability to bilk his followers out of hard-earned dollars to fund his defense actually is still at a decided advantage over most. State Attorney General Letitia James said “white collar crime is not victimless. When the wealthy take more than their fair share, there are fewer resources available for the rest of us. The rule of law applies to all of us.”

We have a candidate who is fighting for democracy. He supports our Constitution and our government. He has experience in global relationships and diplomacy from eight years as vice president. He is navigating the Israel/Palestine friction with determined deliberation toward a ceasefire.

We have another who has admitted that he wants to be a dictator and an isolationist. Who praises authoritarians and wants to cripple NATO, an organization that has kept the world in order since World War II. He supports Vladimir Putin’s aggression and not Ukraine. Who for the selfish reasons of keeping an election campaign issue open, quashed the bipartisan bill that would have addressed our problem at the southern border and been signed into law by the other one.

We have one whose age has taught him caution, to avoid reckless or hasty speech or action, to mediate and moderate. He has surrounded himself with good counsel, and has years of experience navigating congress. He has brought the economy gradually back from the COVID disaster with government aid to businesses and individuals, and he oversaw the distribution of vaccinations that saved the lives of millions of Americans. He is fixing infrastructure, he is bringing manufacturing back home, and domestic petroleum production up to full supply for our demand, while still proceeding with green energy goals. He is helping ease the burden of student loans and he supports women’s rights.

The economy is doing very well. Barring individual circumstances, U.S. citizens are not worse off than they were under the previous president, if reality is to be believed. All indicators are looking good, inflation in general is slowing, with the exception of food prices, which is something that Biden is addressing. These steps were managed deliberately by the Biden administration whereas Trump was lucky to inherit a favorable economy which had been brought back from the 2008 cliff during the Obama years.

Considering the international conflicts that have been both ongoing and recently ignited during the current administration, it is a good thing that we have a mature leader with experience and the wisdom gained through it, rather than an aging self-centered hothead who stirs up trouble in the quest for power and who kept us nervously on the edge of our seats for four years. One may make inadvertent gaffs when discussing serious issues, but the other goes on forever with rambling nonsense, with the sole purpose of entertaining an audience.

Then there is the comparison of age in relation to life expectancy. When you look at the age of some of our former presidents relative to that metric, their age range was not that different from the ages of our current presidential candidates. During the early ’60s, the average life expectancy was around 68 years. Eisenhower was 70. In the late ’70s, it was around 75 years. Reagan was 79. Currently, life expectancy in the US is about 79 years. Our own Congressman Daniel A. Reed served in the House of Representatives right up until his death at the age of 83 in 1959.

When life expectancy in the United States was less than 40 years, Ben Franklin signed the Declaration of Independence at the age of 70. We consider him one of our most intelligent and respected founders.

I’m making the point that age is not the main determination of ability or lack of it, to think or to govern. Age has its outward drawbacks, but focus should be on the attributes that matter.

We should take a lesson from other cultures where age is venerated. Cultures in Japan or India, the Greeks, Native Americans have always honored their elders.

Past civilizations knew the importance of the wisdom gained through aging. Cicero, philosopher of ancient Rome, is quoted as saying “for there is assuredly nothing dearer to a man than wisdom, and though age takes away all else, it undoubtedly brings us that.”

Susan Bigler is a Sheridan resident. Send comments to editorial@observertoday.com