Thursday, October 9, 2008

What do you know?

Which is better?

To be ignorant as a result of knowing?
Or
To be ignorant as a result of not knowing?

4 comments:

Felix said...

It depends on whether or not you are content with your ignorance. Being ok with your decision cannot in any way be called ignorance, unless you are an outside judge with enough ignorance of your own.

Cristina said...

Alright. But don't you agree that there are certain topics in which ignorance cannot be expressed without a challenge to one's ethical reasoning (such as poverty).

i do agree however, that if you are ignorant as a result of knowing - you at least have given yourself a choice, and the ability to justify your ignorance.

However, it is questionable how ignorant you may be after retrieving knowledge (such as in the case above).
Hopefully when you have a choice, you can decide on not being ignorant at all.

Felix said...

I think it depends on how you interpret ignorance in the first place. Would you call a person ignorant for not justifying the political motication of fighting world poverty? How would you define poverty? Would I be in poverty if I’ve chosen not to earn my bread?

Cristina said...

everything comes down to definition. To each his own. "ignorance" is whatever you want it to be.