2

Behold the joke in its original glory

The judge looked down upon the counsel and said,

Judge: Listen, counsel. I have been listening to you for three hours, and I am none the wiser.

Barrister: I expected that, my lord, but I thought you might be better informed.

How is "I thought you might be better informed" a jab at the judge?

tryingtobeastoic
  • 163
  • 1
    YourDictionary has an article (comprehensive if somewhat less than crystal clear at times) comparing/contrasting knowledge, understanding and wisdom. I heard a fine Bible teacher, Huw (I think that's how his name is spelled) Thompson (I remember his joke about the silent p) state this: << Knowledge is knowing what (basic facts), understanding is knowing why (things are as they are, and their interrelations), and wisdom is knowing how (to make sound judgements, effect good changes).>> Bloom's taxonomy adds detail. – Edwin Ashworth Aug 29 '23 at 10:26
  • 2
    If there's a "joke" here, it falls flat on me. But what the barrister says is (at least in principle) ambiguous. He may mean I thought you would have had better background knowledge which would enable you to understand what I've been saying. But that's made less likely by preceding I expected that (if that was the case, why didn't he explain things in a way that didn't require that background knowledge?). The alternative reading is I though it better (I thought it would be a good idea) to try and give you more information, even though you may have been unable to take it all in. – FumbleFingers Aug 29 '23 at 14:09
  • 1
    I’m voting to close this question because explaining jokes is off topic. – Mitch Aug 29 '23 at 19:23

3 Answers3

6

It is a simple play on usage. The word 'wise' has as its first definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary as

B2 (approving) having or showing the ability to make good judgments, based on a deep understanding and experience of life:

The noun wisdom unequivocally refers a quality of sense and understanding. In CED:-

the ability to use your knowledge and experience to make good decisions and judgments

But the phrase being none the wiser or *being wise to something * relates to possessing information about something.

So the joke here involved what the French call a double-entendre. The judge is saying that he is no better informed than be was before the barrister started speaking. The barrister hits back by taking the word 'wiser' in the 'wisdom' sense of 'wiser'.

I would not recommend this type of insult in an actual court of law. The play on language is not an amusing witty 'dig': it is downright rude (a 'contempt', in effect). On the stage, however, the barrister safe and gets a laugh from the audience.

Tuffy
  • 11,165
0

He is basically calling the judge dumb (the opposite of wise) because he wasn't expecting him to be "wiser" at the end of his long argument, he was expecting him to be just as dumb but to at least have the information in his mind.

philipxy
  • 103
Cristopher Gore
  • 17
-1

The judge says "I'm none the wiser" which is a phrase meaning they're not convinced by the argument or don't understand what they other person is trying to say.

The reply is funny because the first part intentionally interprets the word "wiser" in a more literal sense (as in "yeah, I can see that you're not any wiser").

The second part of the reply is then an insinuation that despite the judge not becoming any wiser, the barrister at least assumed the judge would understand what was being said, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

neptun
  • 456
  • 1
    Hello, neptun. Does this really add anything to Tuffy's answer? – Edwin Ashworth Aug 29 '23 at 10:31
  • @EdwinAshworth I haven't read it properly, but it looks like they're trying to something similar to what I said but in a more obtuse way. – neptun Aug 29 '23 at 10:48
  • I don't see how "I'm none the wiser" can imply I'm not convinced (by some argument put forward by the barrister). But I can certainly imagine it being said if the barrister was trying to convince the judge of his client's innocence, if the judge was completely unable to understand the barrister's argument (if you don't understand an argument, you probably can't be "convinced" by it); – FumbleFingers Aug 29 '23 at 15:26
  • Hello @FumbleFingers as you point out, it's difficult to be convinced by an argument you don't fully understand. That's exactly the point. – neptun Aug 30 '23 at 13:18
  • In many court cases there's no reason to suppose the judge needs to be "convinced" of anything at all. Often his only role is to make sure procedures are properly followed, so a *jury* can be "convinced" by either counsel for the defense or counsel for the prosecution. Nothing I see in the question text suggests to me that there's no jury, so I see no reason to suppose the judge needed convincing. And certainly nothing about saying I'm none the wiser implies anything about being convinced. – FumbleFingers Aug 30 '23 at 18:02
  • @FumbleFingers If someone presents an argument, and you say "I'm not convinced", it doesn't mean that you think the argument is wrong, but that you think something is missing to make it complete. When I wrote "not convinced by or don't understand the argument", it is a description of that spectrum between not finding the argument complete and not even understanding the argument. Without knowing what they talked about prior, it's not possible to know where in that the spectrum the judge is at when they say they're "none the wiser" about it. – neptun Aug 31 '23 at 07:54
  • I don't understand any of that. So far as I'm concerned there's no inherent connection between saying "I'm none the wiser" and having someone trying to persuade you of something. The implication is that you wanted information but didn't get it, not that you were inviting someone to convince you of anything. But let's just leave it at that. – FumbleFingers Aug 31 '23 at 18:16
  • @FumbleFingers The situation is that the judge is presented with something that they are supposed to make a decision about, and they don't find the the information convincing enough to make an informed decision about it. You seem stuck on "convincing" having to do with persuading someone with an opinion rather than convincing as in "clear and convincing evidence". But you also keep ignoring the "or" in the sentence so this is not really going anywhere. – neptun Sep 01 '23 at 08:11