in relation to any secret (in a broad sense) information, the knowledge of which entails negative consequences either for the knowledgeable person or for someone else
in relation to the other person's personal secrets, intimate details, correspondence; everything that is “not for the public”
in relation to what the knowledgeable person is not yet ready to understand; what influences his choice, slows down his reaction; forces him to enter into an argument for insignificant reasons-when he can easily do without this “knowledge”
in relation to the future – when the future is in some sense predetermined: the plot of a film, the development of relationships, a career, a fight, a cult ritual, a philosophical dispute, and so on – in such situations, ignorance allows you to live and understand the situation, discover meaning, discover new things, and develop yourself
in relation to the “ultimate truth” and other unfamiliar subjects-as in the previous version, this is more of a position, here it is useful not to know yourself, but to keep awareness of the incompleteness of your knowledge
In all these variants, we are talking about knowledge in the “narrow sense”. That is, about information knowledge. This does not apply to skills and abilities, as well as instincts, intuition, and other effective knowledge.
A person's own understanding of the world is naturally limited. It expands with the acquisition and awareness of personal experience. Therefore, in the moment, a person cannot be aware of the fact of knowing or not knowing what was not in his experience. This does not seem to exist in his reality. Accordingly, he is also unable to assess the benefits of this. Any assessment is possible only from the outside. And it is known that it is almost always wrong. The opportunity to evaluate ignorance appears several times: – when potential knowledge is indicated (the potential benefit of this ignorance) – when knowledge appears (the benefit is evaluated in the situation) – when the time passed (whether it was actually useful). But, based on our limited understanding, at no point can we assess the objective benefit or harm. Another thing is that all our previous experience leads us to the situations in which we find ourselves. And, accordingly, to the assessment that we can give to an event, process, knowledge or ignorance, including. So it doesn't matter what you think about it. It doesn't matter if you think it's good or bad. All the same, this assessment is based on experience, is not objective, and to some extent carries a possible error. And if practically, then you just need to remember that the presence of any knowledge imposes additional responsibility.
The benefits are contextual and relative. In other words, the question can be restated-are there situations when knowledge causes more harm than its absence? After all, the absence of harm is useful. Let's say you are an impressionable person. Suppose you learned that the Sun will go out in 5 billion years. And now you can't sleep well, impressed by the inevitable catastrophe. The harm of this knowledge is obvious. The benefits are questionable. I wish you didn't know that. At the same time, this knowledge did not bring me any mental harm. But I took the time to get to know him. The use of this knowledge is doubtful to me – unless I managed to give you an example. I could have spent more time on, say, physical exercise. That is, from this perspective, ignorance can also be more useful than anything else.
You can dig even deeper and calculate whether the calories spent on learning paid for themselves and whether it was easier to save them on idleness.
It's like, on the principle: “Less you know , you sleep better”? In this sense, ignorance makes life much easier. But I don't know how useful it is to make life easier. It is possible that this state of affairs can be relatively useful when knowledge of something can be dangerous for a person's mental and physical health, but they cannot influence the situation in any way. “Relatively” – because everything flows, everything changes, and if a person cannot influence the situation today, this does not mean that it will be the same tomorrow; but if he is not aware of something, then he will not do anything even when he has the strength to do it. Because “he doesn't know.”
Hello! In life, it is often used,, Less know better sleep,, so ignorance often plays a winning role in any context of relationships between people. Many people who know a lot feel, to put it mildly, uncomfortable in a situation where they do not want to put their arsenal of knowledge into practice. Such a person takes everything very emotionally and experiences it, which adversely affects not only his health, but also his professional development. Similarly, in family relationships, when people live without knowing something hidden from each other, they live and feel comfortable. As soon as the truth that has been covered is revealed, life is clouded. Nothing can be changed, and the pain and,, wounds,, remain very deep. So, again, you know less, you sleep better
Ignorance in general, or ignorance of something specific?
Absolute ignorance is impossible. And the cognition of specific things should be selective, it is also impossible to know everything.
Knowledge is power, and power must be used appropriately and responsibly.
By the way, it is much more difficult to disconnect your mind from mental activity than to study, say, matanalysis. Try it and you will realize that it is almost impossible not to think about anything. Great thinkers have worked hard to achieve the silence of the mind. For what? To start hearing the Voice of Silence. And then they would say,” I know I don't know anything.” After that, they began to be considered sages, since their knowledge was no longer bookish, but spiritual. What kind of Voice of Silence they Heard, you can only understand if you go the same way as they did.
Knowledge is always about the known; and with this known we try to understand the unknown, something that is beyond knowledge. For all people, except the sages, ignorance is harmful and I would say that it is a disease. The sage knows intuitively, not trusting the senses. For them:” To know what you don't know is greatness… ” by Lao Tzu. With respect.
If a person knows that he doesn't know this one or this one or that one over there, then this gives him the opportunity to find out if he wants to.
If a Person does not believe that he does not know, then the path to knowledge is completely closed for him.
There are also some people who, having received information, mistakenly believe that they already know it – this is an even more complex version of ignorance.
Here I would also very much like to clarify what is knowledge and what is information that people who are engaged in education (paradoxically)need. they also call it knowledge.
I think that many people know the phrase – “books contain knowledge”, but they forget to add – “those who wrote it”.
It happens that we are given (sorry for the exact word) information that no one has checked in practice, because it will do anyway, and people (people means) eat (that is, eat).
Therefore, a Person's knowledge consists of information that has been personally tested by him in practice and has given the same result that was reported in the information ( ” + “” – ” ), depending on the skill and knowledge of how to achieve the result.
Ignorance is a very interesting tool. A familiar view of the space around us, rather than a view, but knowledge. The brain plays out a performance as a perception of the world, filling in gaps, giving objects properties, so all sorts of illusions, such as the Ames Window, are possible, even after the secret is revealed. Without knowing something, a person is not limited by this knowledge and is able to make a breakthrough. When we search for something definite in space, we limit ourselves to that very definite point.
It happens, well, from school examples-alchemists did not know that the transformation of metals into gold by the means available to them is basically impossible. But experimenting, in the process of working on this topic, we discovered different properties of substances and technologies that were useful. It was found in the memoirs of the participants of the Second World War, for example, in this spirit – if we knew that the enemy had such forces concentrated in this area, we would never have tried to storm it. But they themselves were disoriented and dumbfounded by our audacity and bravery, and it was here that we broke through the front…
Active ignorance leads to relatively rapid destruction. It is like destroying itself, thereby becoming the building material for new combinations in cognition. In this sense, active ignorance is the “cold” pole and is useful for evolution, as the opposite of knowledge (the ” hot ” pole). Plus needs minus, in the struggle of their evolutionary unity.
Passive ignorance, or more precisely ignorance, also leads to destruction, but the process is long, through decomposition and contamination of the surrounding fluids of decomposition. Thus, passive ignorance of the “warm” brings great harm to evolution, slows it down. So it is said in the Revelation of John the Theologian:
“I know your deeds — you are neither cold nor hot; oh that you were cold or hot! But because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew you out of my mouth.”
Definitely.
Only if it is a conscious ignorance.
Main options:
In all these variants, we are talking about knowledge in the “narrow sense”. That is, about information knowledge. This does not apply to skills and abilities, as well as instincts, intuition, and other effective knowledge.
A person's own understanding of the world is naturally limited. It expands with the acquisition and awareness of personal experience. Therefore, in the moment, a person cannot be aware of the fact of knowing or not knowing what was not in his experience. This does not seem to exist in his reality.
Accordingly, he is also unable to assess the benefits of this. Any assessment is possible only from the outside. And it is known that it is almost always wrong.
The opportunity to evaluate ignorance appears several times:
– when potential knowledge is indicated (the potential benefit of this ignorance)
– when knowledge appears (the benefit is evaluated in the situation)
– when the time passed (whether it was actually useful).
But, based on our limited understanding, at no point can we assess the objective benefit or harm.
Another thing is that all our previous experience leads us to the situations in which we find ourselves. And, accordingly, to the assessment that we can give to an event, process, knowledge or ignorance, including.
So it doesn't matter what you think about it. It doesn't matter if you think it's good or bad. All the same, this assessment is based on experience, is not objective, and to some extent carries a possible error.
And if practically, then you just need to remember that the presence of any knowledge imposes additional responsibility.
The benefits are contextual and relative. In other words, the question can be restated-are there situations when knowledge causes more harm than its absence? After all, the absence of harm is useful. Let's say you are an impressionable person. Suppose you learned that the Sun will go out in 5 billion years. And now you can't sleep well, impressed by the inevitable catastrophe. The harm of this knowledge is obvious. The benefits are questionable. I wish you didn't know that. At the same time, this knowledge did not bring me any mental harm. But I took the time to get to know him. The use of this knowledge is doubtful to me – unless I managed to give you an example. I could have spent more time on, say, physical exercise. That is, from this perspective, ignorance can also be more useful than anything else.
You can dig even deeper and calculate whether the calories spent on learning paid for themselves and whether it was easier to save them on idleness.
It's like, on the principle: “Less you know , you sleep better”? In this sense, ignorance makes life much easier. But I don't know how useful it is to make life easier. It is possible that this state of affairs can be relatively useful when knowledge of something can be dangerous for a person's mental and physical health, but they cannot influence the situation in any way. “Relatively” – because everything flows, everything changes, and if a person cannot influence the situation today, this does not mean that it will be the same tomorrow; but if he is not aware of something, then he will not do anything even when he has the strength to do it. Because “he doesn't know.”
Hello!
In life, it is often used,, Less know better sleep,, so ignorance often plays a winning role in any context of relationships between people.
Many people who know a lot feel, to put it mildly, uncomfortable in a situation where they do not want to put their arsenal of knowledge into practice. Such a person takes everything very emotionally and experiences it, which adversely affects not only his health, but also his professional development.
Similarly, in family relationships, when people live without knowing something hidden from each other, they live and feel comfortable. As soon as the truth that has been covered is revealed, life is clouded. Nothing can be changed, and the pain and,, wounds,, remain very deep.
So, again, you know less, you sleep better
Ignorance in general, or ignorance of something specific?
Absolute ignorance is impossible. And the cognition of specific things should be selective, it is also impossible to know everything.
Knowledge is power, and power must be used appropriately and responsibly.
By the way, it is much more difficult to disconnect your mind from mental activity than to study, say, matanalysis. Try it and you will realize that it is almost impossible not to think about anything. Great thinkers have worked hard to achieve the silence of the mind. For what? To start hearing the Voice of Silence. And then they would say,” I know I don't know anything.” After that, they began to be considered sages, since their knowledge was no longer bookish, but spiritual. What kind of Voice of Silence they Heard, you can only understand if you go the same way as they did.
Knowledge is always about the known; and with this known we try to understand the unknown, something that is beyond knowledge. For all people, except the sages, ignorance is harmful and I would say that it is a disease. The sage knows intuitively, not trusting the senses. For them:” To know what you don't know is greatness… ” by Lao Tzu. With respect.
Of course, yes!
If a person knows that he doesn't know this one or this one or that one over there, then this gives him the opportunity to find out if he wants to.
If a Person does not believe that he does not know, then the path to knowledge is completely closed for him.
There are also some people who, having received information, mistakenly believe that they already know it – this is an even more complex version of ignorance.
Here I would also very much like to clarify what is knowledge and what is information that people who are engaged in education (paradoxically)need. they also call it knowledge.
I think that many people know the phrase – “books contain knowledge”, but they forget to add – “those who wrote it”.
It happens that we are given (sorry for the exact word) information that no one has checked in practice, because it will do anyway, and people (people means) eat (that is, eat).
Therefore, a Person's knowledge consists of information that has been personally tested by him in practice and has given the same result that was reported in the information ( ” + “” – ” ), depending on the skill and knowledge of how to achieve the result.
Ignorance is a very interesting tool. A familiar view of the space around us, rather than a view, but knowledge. The brain plays out a performance as a perception of the world, filling in gaps, giving objects properties, so all sorts of illusions, such as the Ames Window, are possible, even after the secret is revealed. Without knowing something, a person is not limited by this knowledge and is able to make a breakthrough. When we search for something definite in space, we limit ourselves to that very definite point.
It happens, well, from school examples-alchemists did not know that the transformation of metals into gold by the means available to them is basically impossible. But experimenting, in the process of working on this topic, we discovered different properties of substances and technologies that were useful. It was found in the memoirs of the participants of the Second World War, for example, in this spirit – if we knew that the enemy had such forces concentrated in this area, we would never have tried to storm it. But they themselves were disoriented and dumbfounded by our audacity and bravery, and it was here that we broke through the front…
Active ignorance leads to relatively rapid destruction. It is like destroying itself, thereby becoming the building material for new combinations in cognition. In this sense, active ignorance is the “cold” pole and is useful for evolution, as the opposite of knowledge (the ” hot ” pole). Plus needs minus, in the struggle of their evolutionary unity.
Passive ignorance, or more precisely ignorance, also leads to destruction, but the process is long, through decomposition and contamination of the surrounding fluids of decomposition. Thus, passive ignorance of the “warm” brings great harm to evolution, slows it down. So it is said in the Revelation of John the Theologian:
“I know your deeds — you are neither cold nor hot; oh that you were cold or hot! But because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spew you out of my mouth.”