Author Topic: Stuff you hate  (Read 195371 times)

GenesisOne

  • Bounty Seeker
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1215
  • "Time Travel? Possible? Don't make me laugh!"
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #975 on: January 18, 2010, 04:40:58 pm »

Thought, has it occurred to you that there are different types of ignorance?

For the sake of clarity and definition, Ignorance is the state in which:

a) one lacks knowledge (i.e. absent of knowledge)
b) is unaware of something (i.e. innocence)
c) chooses to subjectively ignore information (i.e. willful ignorance)
 
This should not be confused with being "unintelligent", as one's level of intelligence and level of education or general awareness are not the same. 

I have seem this etymological confusion committed on numerous occasions in several topics here, and such people don't even recognize the error they committed.  As such, they jump to conclusions (much like you did right) that are without a solid base.  They assume that the accused is committing the third type of ignorance and not the first two as I have listed.

The word "ignorant" is an adjective describing a person in the state of being unaware. The term may be used specifically (e.g. I can be an expert in math, and totally ignorant of civil engineering) or generally (e.g. an ignorant person), although the second application is used less as a description and more as a personal insult to the accused.

Hopefully, this clears up some of the confusion.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #976 on: January 18, 2010, 06:58:42 pm »
Thought, has it occurred to you that there are different types of ignorance?

All specific forms of ignorance can also be described as "ignorance," except for willful ignorance, which carries an additional component (of willfulness). That's the key distinction.

There, you now have a lovely list of topics that you may or may not be knowledgeable about. If you do not go investigate the ones you aren't familiar with, then you are willfully choosing to remain ignorant. When you get done with those, I am quite sure I can come up with another small selection to keep you busy. And another. And another.

Very good, Thought. A devastating argument. Of course, like many things it becomes less definitive when one applies a different context. Is knowing that one does not know, and resolving to know in the future, and thus resolving not to know in the present...as serious an act of willful ignorance as knowing that one does not know and being totally fine with it? Specifically, what is the significance of the temporal component in all this to you? Then, would you consider all ignorance to be philosophically equal? If one is content not to know the exhaustive details of every latest gossip magazine, is that as serious an offense of willful ignorance as being content not to know the news in general?

You made this argument as one of convenience to rebut Arakial. But how sincerely do you mean it? How far are you willing to go to defend and strengthen it?

Uboa

  • Acacia Deva (+500)
  • *
  • Posts: 587
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #977 on: January 18, 2010, 11:03:20 pm »
Seeing as none of us have enough time in the world to become knowledgeable about everything, we all have to pick and choose what we're to pursue knowledge about and too remain ignorant about.  In light of this, is "willful ignorance", as it's been defined so far, an unavoidable aspect of life?  How does one prioritize becoming willfully knowledgeable about subjects X, Y, and Z?  And, in light of the fact that there's a nigh innumerable multitude of other subjects where those come from, how does one choose what to exclude, just for practicality's sake?  (Is this what you're getting at with your question -- sentence the last, paragraph the first, post-Thought quote -- J?)

Even if one begins to pursue a subject seriously or just as a hobby, it's wholly understandable that they might want to stop if they get the impression that the hurdles they'll have to jump, in order to get to a comfortable level of knowledge with the subject, render that comfortable level of knowledge undesirable.  Those "hurdles" may look silly to you or me, but to the novice they are frustrating.  Keep in mind, said novice is a person who may also not be fully convinced of the worthwhile nature of this pursuit.  Perhaps they set out looking for validation in the pursuit itself and never found it.  In light of that, they may throw up their hands in frustration and settle to be ignorant about the subject in order to move on with their lives.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #978 on: January 19, 2010, 12:15:28 am »
In my own philosophy, our comparatively high level of knowledge places an incredible obligation of character upon us to learn more. When a person exists in bliss, none of their ignorance is willful. But once those first steps are taken in curiosity, one discovery leads to another, and it becomes impossible to ever stop learning without being willfully ignorant. There's an enormous forward pressure on us to learn, and the source of that pressure is the threat of willful ignorance.

But if one is willfully ignorant simply because one has learned of something unknown and is not immediately in pursuit of it, as Thought suggested, then we are all willfully ignorant anyway, on a vast scale, and the smarter we are the more willfully ignorant we are. It would be impossible to simultaneously pursue all of these areas of known unknowns. Thus we are all reduced to wickedness which is only heightened by our attempts to rectify it. I owe Thought a good deal of credit for posing such a fascinating problem to what, for me, is a central philosophical principle.

In my view, then, "willful" ignorance cannot be as simple as being aware of a question mark and not immediately moving to answer it. My preliminary thought is that there must be not merely a desire not to know, but an acknowledgment (even if only to oneself) that answering it would introduce the individual to meaningful knowledge. Thus, the difference between depriving oneself of power versus wasting one's time.

This raises the issue of how to decide the worth of information before learning it, which I never considered necessary in my unqualified view of "willful ignorance" in the past.

Plenty to think about. Truly, Thought, my thanks.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #979 on: January 19, 2010, 11:28:32 am »
Your argument makes another leap--I was talking about those who, and this is key, take an interest in a topic and choose not to pursue it due to low persistence.

Having thought about your original comments more, I think you might have just misapplied terminology. It isn't so much willful ignorance that you are annoyed at, though that is related. Rather, it is the lack of due diligence on the commenter's part. Does that seem to be a fair perception?

The commenter was attempting to learn about installing Linux, thus he was not engaging in willful ignorance by the very fact that he sought out the article. That the article is slightly misleading in its attempt at being a beginner’s guide is a valid criticism, one which if the individual had appeared to be an expert in the field I think you would have found more palatable. That is, if the individual had said something along the lines of "This article is not beginner level. For example, what is sudo? That wasn’t covered until my second year of major-work at my University; maybe that isn’t advanced, but it isn’t basic either.”

The commenter wanted to know information, he was interested in it, but from that single comment it appears that he was unwilling to perform his due diligence. While that article was not a "beginners guide," and so the poster's complaint was valid, the poster should have also been willing to perform the leg-work (or fingerwork, really) to find out the terms they didn't know.

Since this touches upon a theme of the Compendium, it is no surprise that such behavior would not sit well with a member here. If one is interested in a topic enough to research it a little, then one should be willing to research the hell out of it, or so the local philosophy goes.

There is a fine line between willful ignorance and lack of due diligence. I am proposing, and I think Uboa was as well, that willful ignorance is too strong a term in this case.

Thought, has it occurred to you that there are different types of ignorance?

Yup. You might notice that in my previous post I listed a number of topics so that Arakial would be aware of those topics (thus eliminating Ignorance B, by your definitions). I then offered him a challenge so that he had to make a choice (thus eliminating the possibility of passive ignorance, which you didn't list). All this was done to narrow down Arakial's options and force him either into an undesirable course of action (endless researching of topics which he might not be interested in) or into admitting that willful ignorance isn't always a bad thing. I would say that I am always against extremes, but such a statement seems to be a little too extreme for me ;)

To note, while ignoring information is indeed willful ignorance, that isn't all it is. Willful ignorance could also be described as intentionally being not curious. One might acknowledge a particular set of information and yet refuse to put that information together in order to extrapolate meaning.

Specifically, what is the significance of the temporal component in all this to you?

Well one must always remain ignorant in the present. There is no way that even you could learn all there is to know (or even a smattering of what there is to know) about, say, Kid Radd in this very instant. Any attempt to eliminate your ignorance will inherently take place in the future. Thus, the temporal component is significant in terms of intent. If one will become informed of a topic in the future, then that is no longer willful ignorance. But if one only says that one will become informed of a topic in the future but does not make this a reality, then that is willful ignorance. Intent is the key. So the temporal component is largely nonsensical, as even that returns again to if one is intending to remain ignorant or not.

You made this argument as one of convenience to rebut Arakial. But how sincerely do you mean it? How far are you willing to go to defend and strengthen it?

Humanity thrives because of specialization. Not all of us knows about farming, for example, because some of us can know about it and we can all benefit. Willful ignorance is a term that is often used disparagingly and in the context of looking down on an individual because they do not know what we know. The thing is, not everyone should know what I know, and I should not know everything that you know. Thus, there are topics that we, as human beings, have to acknowledge to ourselves and others that a) we don't know much (if anything) about and b) we won’t know much (or anything) about it in the future either. We should also not hold another individuals ignorance of topics that we care about against them, at least not in a reactionary way. There are topics that we might say that all humans should be informed about, but not every topic is that way.

There is a general theme in American society that the individual has to be good at everything. There is a particular shame that is bred into us regarding ignorance; it pains us to ever admit that we might be ignorant in a topic, even if there is no reason for us to be knowledgeable about it. This is most painful when it comes unexpectedly, when our ignorance is demonstrated by others rather than identified by ourselves. This is one of the things that I think holds back many people from achieving excellence. Instead of developing their strengths into paragons of virtue, people waste their time attempting to reduce their weaknesses in order to avoid the possibility of this shame. To address character flaws is important, but bringing everything aspect of ourselves up to average isn't as important as bringing a few aspects of ourselves up to phenomenal.

I am thus proposing that, in the proper circumstances, willful ignorance can be a virtue. If a medical doctor doesn't know about anime, oh well. An anime creator might impress upon this doctor of the cultural value of the art form, but the doctor is still within good form if they choose not to investigate it. Indeed, if instead of being a doctor this individual is a medical student, then ignoring anime in favor of medical information is a commendable virtue, one that I think most of us would prefer if our doctors had in their youth. Willful ignorance in this case is desirable. If an anime creator, on the other hand, doesn't know about anime, then willful ignorance becomes problematic. What might have been a virtue is now a vice.

As an aside, my comparison of medical knowledge to anime knowledge might seem laughable, as most people would assume that the former is important while the latter is not. I would disagree; medical knowledge can improve the quality of life and lifespan of a few people, anime knowledge can improve the quality of a culture and the lifespan of that culture. But I'm a historian; one should expect that I’d be biased more towards the humanities than the sciences.

Becoming an expert on a topic means learning more and more about less and less. One of those things that separates humanity from other animals is our ability to analyze the cacophony of information we receive and pick out those tidbits that are important. Willful ignorance, then, is even what makes us human. But I'm a moderate! Here I am arguing that total rejection of willful ignorance is harmful, but I would also argue that a total acceptance of willful ignorance is harmful. There are so many impossible things in the world, but if we want to do the impossible, we have to select a few that are important to us and ignore the rest.

This relates back to the original comments regarding Linux. The vice of the commenter, the vice that I believe struck a chord with Arakial, is a lack of due diligence. The individual wanted to know information but only took halfhearted (maybe even one-eighth-hearted or worse) steps to obtain that information. The analysis of the article was valid; it does not seem to be a beginners guide. But the commenter should have not stopped with that article (and hopefully they didn't).

Willful Ignorance – because to know one thing really well means we have to know ten other things not at all.

Due diligence - cause we have to research the hell out of the stuff we want to know.



... hmm, this water tastes a little funny. Urge to post random anime pictures, rising!

Arakial

  • Porrean (+50)
  • *
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #980 on: January 19, 2010, 05:29:09 pm »
Touche, Thought. Perhaps I used the wrong words.

But as a parting thought, should willful ignorance and lack of due diligence be treated any differently, given their uncannily similar results?

Sajainta

  • Survivor of the Darkness
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2004
  • Reporting live from Purgatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #981 on: January 19, 2010, 10:57:33 pm »
I just came across this link on advertisements about child sexual abuse that someone had posted on their Facebook status.

Just to warn you, the images and the video that follows are very disturbing and graphic.  It was very hard for me to read, because the first time I was raped was when I was a little girl, but I felt I should continue reading / watching.  The video especially hit home for me.  It made me cry, for a lot of reasons.  But that's something I don't want to get into.

This is truly something I hate.  Not the ads and videos themselves, but...the fact that this is so grotesquely prevalent.

This is horrid.

It needs to end.

ZombieBucky

  • Springtime of Youth
  • Squaretable Knight (+400)
  • *
  • Posts: 409
  • <insert witty phrase to match above avatar>
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #982 on: January 20, 2010, 07:16:54 am »
yikes. i... i cant even imagine it. its just wrong how prevelant it is.
i hate my own forgetfullness. i think i fell asleep with my contacts in, but im not sure. i cant find them, at least. now i cant remember where my glasses are... its hard to drive when you have my vision.

Sajainta

  • Survivor of the Darkness
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2004
  • Reporting live from Purgatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #983 on: February 05, 2010, 12:52:02 am »
Copypasta'd from another thread, but it needs to be said here.

It infuriates me that there is so much ignorance surrounding those who are transgendered.  "What, so...you're gay?"  Um, NO, my brother is NOT gay.  He has a girlfriend, but that does NOT make him gay.  "You should be happy with the body you're born in.  Why can't you just accept it?  Get over it!"  Ignorance, ignorance, ignorance.

KebreI

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • A true man never dies, even when he's killed
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #984 on: February 05, 2010, 04:58:07 am »
I will state it here, loud and in full understanding of what I say. I think it is complete crap to say one is only a "Male/Female in body" and then claim to be transgendered. There are transgendered people out there with legitimate claims, because they are physiologically different. Now they are gay and I have not a single qualm with it, its the lying to themselves about there biology that I have a problem with.

On another note; I do think that Gay is a valid insult, as it is meant to question there sexuality. Just as I have used Heterosexual as one to before as well to a good friend of mine.

Radical_Dreamer

  • Entity
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2778
    • View Profile
    • The Chrono Compendium
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #985 on: February 06, 2010, 04:09:00 pm »
Gender != Sex.

Sajainta

  • Survivor of the Darkness
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2004
  • Reporting live from Purgatory.
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #986 on: February 06, 2010, 04:10:21 pm »
Did you mean to type "Gender =/= Sex" ?  Not trying to assume, I just have no idea what the "!" means.

MsBlack

  • Squaretable Knight (+400)
  • *
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #987 on: February 06, 2010, 04:16:55 pm »
=/= ≡ !=
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 04:19:17 pm by MsBlack »

Radical_Dreamer

  • Entity
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2778
    • View Profile
    • The Chrono Compendium
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #988 on: February 06, 2010, 04:18:37 pm »
Did you mean to type "Gender =/= Sex" ?  Not trying to assume, I just have no idea what the "!" means.

!= means "does not equal".

TMC

  • Earthbound (+15)
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Lovecraft Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Stuff you hate
« Reply #989 on: February 06, 2010, 04:23:49 pm »
I hate arguments. Especially with my gf...and the worst thing...I can't try to fix things as she's in Costa Rica now, argh.