A little while back an idea was posted i belive by namless "Evil is Ignorance, Good is Awareness"
What i am wondering is when one crosses the line from ignorance to awarnes? What seperates the ignorant from the aware? We have danced aroundthis a bit in our discussion here.
If there is in fact infinite information, or at least more information then our mind can store, then at what point does one become informed enough to be considered aware? I think it is imposible to really draw such a line because no mater how much we know it is always going to be a miniscule ammount compared to the ammount of information out there.
One can say that ignorance and awarness can only be looked at with relation to a paticular topic, or concept. But even then no mater what the subject no one can know everything ther is to know about it, so again what is the threshold for being aware rather then ignorant?
I would have to say that the thing that separetes the ignorant from the aware, is the awarness of their own ignorance. "I know that i know nothing". The only true ignorance is certainty and conviction. Letting go of certinty and the ilussion allows one to see things more objectively, and think more abstractlly.
Onece you let go of all your convictions realizing that nothing you know is certain. And once you let go of the desire for solid ground, which is conviction, and dive into the ocean of uncertainty you realize that that piece of land that you stood so firmlly upon was nothing more then a mirage.
Discuss
Jesse Akers on March 24, 2008, 4:59 PM
it is to say the journey not the destination is important,
to struggle against ignorance though we shall continue to be overpowered by the power of it we are left to choose to allow it consume us, or to continually fight it
do not go quietly into the good night…go towards the light…..be self examing…. a life unexamined is not worth living….know the truth and the truth shall set you free….and on and on and on
James Randazzo on March 24, 2008, 5:00 PM
one possability may be naivete.
Denys Artasevych on March 24, 2008, 5:33 PM
True enough jesse, but what you and whiteman moore are talking about is the aditude towards knoledge, examination, and towards life. Im talking about the acceptance of our lack of knoledge, and leting go of the things we are so convinced are “true”. I think this must precede the outlook you speak of. Nothing can be proven true beyond all doubt, if you keep asking yourself questions long enough. That being the case in order to trully think critically certainty needs to go. What most people think of as facts are really just educated or uneducated guesses, and i think we need to acgnolidge that.
And yes its the journey not the destination.
Jesse Akers on March 24, 2008, 9:25 PM
an interesting read if the paste thing screws up again here is the link
http://www.rzim.org/resources/essay_arttext.php?id=12
James Beilby and David K. Clark
A Brief Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge
printer friendly version (opens in a new window)
————————————————————————————————————————
Excerpted from the RZIM Critical Questions booklet, Why Bother With Truth?
Published in Areopagus Journal 2/2 (April 2002): 13-18.
Posted with permission by Areopagus Journal (http://www.apologeticsresctr.org).
How can we know the world around us? How can we know God? How can we know anything at all? These are some of the questions of epistemology, the study of theories of knowledge.
Epistemology has two main goals. First, we want to find as much truth as possible. And second, we want to avoid as much falsehood as possible. These two goals stand in tension with each other. I can easily acquire very large amounts of truth. If I were totally gullible, I%u2019d believe just everything I hear. That would give me the largest number of true beliefs possible. But the problem is that along with all the true beliefs I%u2019d acquire, I%u2019d also obtain many false beliefs. So I%u2019d have some needles of truth hidden in a very large haystack of error. That wouldn%u2019t help me much.
Similarly, I could easily avoid as much error as possible. If I were completely skeptical, I%u2019d disbelieve everything. That would safeguard me against every falsehood. But the problem is that I%u2019d miss out on all truth whatsoever%u2014and some truth might be very important. So that wouldn%u2019t help me much either.
No one urges us to believe absolutely everything. But some very important and influential thinkers do advise us to believe nothing (or very little)%u2014or at least they recommend that we believe only when an idea is incredibly well supported. This is skepticism. Skepticism puts most of its energies into avoiding error, and very little effort into finding truth. So how can we develop an understanding of epistemology that goes beyond skepticism? How can we balance our desire for truth with our need to avoid error?
Truth and Knowledge
It%u2019s critical to distinguish truth and knowledge. Too many people equate these two concepts, with chaotic results. But truth and knowledge are different concepts. Put simply, true affirmations are those that correspond to reality. So truth is a characteristic of statements that properly describe aspects of the real world. This is called the correspondence view of truth.
The correspondence view of truth isn%u2019t a method for testing truth claims or discovering knowledge. It%u2019s a definition of what we mean when we say that a statement %u201Cis true.%u201D According to the correspondence view, what makes a statement true is reality itself. A statement like, %u201CThis car is red,%u201D is true, simply if the car in question actually is red. Truth doesn%u2019t depend on anyone knowing the truth. So, for instance, even if no one%u2019s around to discover that it%u2019s 115
Edward C on March 24, 2008, 10:22 PM
Ignorance and Awareness, what seperates the two?
Your level of Perception.
Denys Artasevych on March 24, 2008, 11:36 PM
Care to elaborate nameless.
Edward C on March 25, 2008, 12:45 AM
Look up the words “Perception”, “Awareness” and “Ignorance” in various Dictionaries and apply what you learn and eventually you’ll understand what I mean ;-)
Jesse Akers on March 25, 2008, 8:27 AM
awareness- assuming that their is a reality it would be the ability or inability to relate to that reality,
think of true reality as a straight line that constitutes everything, however through our lense of perception that straight line may look like a pink elephant, although that does not change the true form of the reality as a straight line our perception causes us to react in ways that are uncofonrming to how they “ought to be”, everything from thinking the earth is flat, to thinking your foot is going to hit ground but the step you are on in reality is much bigger than you anticipated, resulting in tripping or falling over oneself,
i believe that when we are in tune with reality we operate much better, maybe resulting in longer life spans or other signs of “holiness”
Edward C on March 26, 2008, 1:46 AM
Yeah sort of,
Let me explain further…
If you haven’t watched a particular movie or read that special book for 5-years, and now you watch it – do you now PERCEIVE things that you did not perceive back when you first experience that same story.
The book or movie has not changed but you surely have and if you can see more layers than before your awareness is increasing, if you can perceive less than before then my friend you are dying.
Jesse Akers on March 26, 2008, 6:54 PM
i like it nameless- life is a book we are reading over and over again, some are skimming, and others read critically
Edward C on March 26, 2008, 10:48 PM
The amount of layers is Infinite and when you leap forward you will feel the need to look behind to clear the way for others on the path of clarity (also commonly know as “Enlightenment”).
Enlightenment is only the beginning of the journey ;-)
Jesse Akers on March 27, 2008, 10:56 AM
Onece you let go of all your convictions realizing that nothing you know is certain. And once you let go of the desire for solid ground, which is conviction, and dive into the ocean of uncertainty you realize that that piece of land that you stood so firmlly upon was nothing more then a mirage
if it was a mirage how was it holding me up?
do we need another thread on reality?
Denys Artasevych on March 27, 2008, 5:55 PM
Well fair enough that analogy was not perfect. But i am sure you get my meaning. I gues the best analogy would be that the various islands we see and swim towards are our convictions. But fundamentally any one of them could be a mirage so there is no way to say that we are swiming towards one that is real. Or they may be all just illusions.
I read that article that you posted jesse. What they are talking about is basically making educated guesses. Taking the information and making the best decission. But again fundamentally its just a guess, no matter how good of one. I do not disagree with them i make guesses all the time in my dally life, i assume that the cup im drinking out off wil not disintegrate, i asume that the coin fill fall whan i flip it. But i also realize that there is no certainty they are all just assumptions. Skepticism is not necesarilly about denying all information, its about realizing the lack of certainty.
Edward C on March 27, 2008, 7:38 PM
Apparantly 90% of the Universe is made of “Dark Matter” which we don’t know how to measure yet.
Therefore we only know less than 10% of reality. Anyone who presents themself as “wise”, “intelligent” or an “expert” knows less than 10% and therefore is a fool!
Jesse Akers on March 28, 2008, 10:24 AM
good point nameless! skeptic i will be back…hold on….the slavery thing isnt coming along like i thought it would the topic people love to debate has turned into an empty thread….talk to you tomorrow
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register