I have learned not to believe anything someone says unless they can support it logically
1/. Who have you learned this from? Or ... have you come to it yourself? If it is latter, disregard the former (or question the notion of 'self' which would be far more relevant in this context)
2/. What do you mean by 'logically'? Are you prepared to question such logic?
Does not the word philosophy mean a love of wisdom?
No. It is a frightening trend to attribute such 'meaning' to it. This is simply a linguistic root. Philosophical activity is the attempt to prevent dogma (or 'truth'). If truth - or 'a correct answer' prevails, philosphical activity has failed. However, wherever 'truth' is claimed, philosophical activity finds itself called back into action.
Is not wisdom knowing what is right and what is wrong?
Yes. You are right. This is 'not wisdom'.
You say a search for truth is bad?
Yes, I do (and I stand by it). We should not search for truth. We should try to prevent truth. Truth operates dogmatically unless it is questioned; such questioning must be ceaseless. Nothing must ever be accepted as 'truth'. We can accept something as being 'relevant', 'worthwhile', 'useful' but never, ever, 'true'. The point at which we accept something as being true is the point at which we not only cease to engage in philosophical activity, but the point at which we should and must be ashamed to call ourselves 'philosophers' (not merely because there is no such thing ... there are thinkers who engage in philosophical activity but no thinker has ever operated purely philosphically).
support your statment otherwise what you say is meaningless.
Consider my statement, otherwise what you say is trivial.