|
|
|
United States24483 Posts
This is too complex for there to be a simple answer regarding who is right/wrong. However, I don't consider Nirvana to be good philosophical evidence of anything...
|
United States4796 Posts
On September 20 2009 04:18 micronesia wrote:
This is too complex for there to be a simple answer regarding who is right/wrong. However, I don't consider Nirvana to be good philosophical evidence of anything...
I'm not looking for a right/wrong. Just more insight, as I'm a scrub in philosophical terms and there are bright minds here.
|
|
|
I don't think they're related at all... but make her read Flowers for Algernon in support of your argument.
|
Well, in my opinion, I would say that it depends of what a "feeling" and what "greatest" mean I would say. If you're ignorant, then you don't have to worry, to think too much, you just feel the happiness and every single thing and you are happy. However, someone who is "omniscient" will understand the same Buddhist idea that worrying doesn't make you happy. However, he would also know that happiness is only a feeling, etc, and then he can understand that he is free of everything, because everything doesn't really matter.
A person who say that life sucks because everything is meaningless could be ignorant of the meaning of "life". Because, in my opinion, a total omniscient person wouldn't care about happiness or if "life sucks", because life wouldn't be that important for him I think. If we say that life doesn't exist and that we are all robots programmed by physics/god/[insert something here] and that we have no free will, then we have no reasons to care about what happen to us. We can be totally free of that and reach the perfect peace.
I would say, then, that you are both right on a certain level. When a person gets full of knowledge, but not omniscient, he would probably be sad of a lot of stuff, care about a lot of stuff, hates a lot of stuff in the world like politics/corporations/hunger/body's restriction/etc. But then if we go even higher and someone understands and knows everything in the world, and that this person is not restricted by humans hormons, then this person can't desire anything, can't hate anything and is totally free of what happens to him. He would be in peace, so happy.
That's only my opinion though =)
|
|
|
the question seems too abstract.
|
My philosphical opinion is that "knowing feels good?" is wrong way to place the question
Researching and studying is one way to live in the world - an occupation - and, in that regards, is just like any other way to live be it farming os hausekeeping or any other occupation.
I am not saying that every occupation is the same, but that any of these have the same axiological status: they are "worth" the same on the most general level.
However, it does not mean that because every occupation is worth the same form the general axiological point of view they are worth the same to individuals.
As a matter of fact, different people have different dispositions and preferences.
So, I propose that the right way to place the question is: "does knowing feels good to me?". Knowledge is nothing but one way to live natural to human beings condition, but it is not the only one or intrinsically better than the other ways to live. It is a personal choice.
|
Once I asked my psychologist.
What is the fundamental difference between light and darkness ?
His answer was "In the light you can truly see and understand what is around you"
|
Can you please rephrase the question
|
Louis Lowry's "The giver" presents one of the best answers to this questions, if you dont know, how will it hurt you? The book presents a very convincing answer to this question by presenting a closed culture and society that is fascist and free of any external factors affecting it.
If you do not realize the outside knowledge that has no effect on you, how will it effect the nature of your culture and ideologies that are yours. There are 2 reasons why ignorance is bliss, the first I believe that all the hatred and anger in this world are a result and arise from the core sin that arises from our human nature which is "envy", you know what the other person has and you feel jealousy because of it which gives rise to other feelings such as hatred and want, desire for the other thing, which is the main cause of wars. It is not ignorance that drives happiness, but it is knowledge which is the lack of ignorance that creates feelings of hatred and sadness .
I also disagree with ignorance being a feeling, it doesnt make any sense, ignorance itself is defined as the property of the lack of knowledge, it is not a feeling at all, but the consequences of the lack of knowledge might lead to a more satisfied life, whileas ignorance has no effect on the state around you except the fact that you oblivious to it which is not a feeling but a state.
|
Hungary11233 Posts
You two appear to have different conceptions of "understanding".
The understanding she uses directly implies happiness. Imagine "understanding TvZ" in the way that you not only grasp the concepts but also know how to apply them, obviously making you very happy.
Your understanding* only implies knowing about things, but not directly benefiting from it. You know about TvZ, but can't do it yet.
So, you are talking about different things, only joined together by the equivoke "understanding".
|
both ignorance and understanding of something does not necessarily connect to someone's happiness. Because each person have their own notions of what happiness is. These notions changes as more information a person have available to them.
For example, let's suppose a couple enjoys their happiness together, as the wife has no information about the husband cheating on her.
Wife still feel happiness, but she's ignorant about the cheating, hence ignorance is blissed.
But this is all under the assumption of that wife will not be happy once she finds out about the cheating.
What if this wife doesn't give a shit? She doesn't care about her man cheats, as long as he provide her with everything she needs, she's happy. As her notion of happiness is not the same as those of us. We think cheating promotes unhappiness, but she thinks it doesn't matter.
Could we still call her ignorance is blissed given the facts of her notions of happiness?
The answer is no. if anything is ignorant, those of us who label the wife "ignorance is blissed" is the truly ignorant one, because we are the one who's ignorant about the wife's notion of happiness.
Each person has their own notions of happiness, one has to find what these notions are to make themselves happy. (aka understanding one's inner happiness principle)
|
Canada167 Posts
|
I'm going to answer this with one sentence. This isn't a topic that can spark a huge "philosophical debate". That's just padding the question with shit that isn't there.
So...just think of it this way...
You can't be stressed about shit you don't know.
|
Since I've spent the larger portion of my life learning, I'll console myself by saying complete knowledge > complete ignorance.
|
On September 20 2009 08:35 Triple7 wrote:
Since I've spent the larger portion of my life learning, I'll console myself by saying complete knowledge > complete ignorance.
i would say complete knowledge = complete ignorance
|
On September 20 2009 07:56 PH wrote:
I'm going to answer this with one sentence. This isn't a topic that can spark a huge "philosophical debate". That's just padding the question with shit that isn't there.
So...just think of it this way...
You can't be stressed about shit you don't know.
yes you can
in fact that is the very source of fear, one of man's greatest stressors
this entire topic is mostly semantics
|
I have always wondered what my life would have been like if I was born in a 3rd world country and my life revolved around merely surviving. I feel like life is tough when you have no real goal to meet beyond obeying your societal standards like graduating high school and going to college. And more significantly, figuring out what you want to do with your life which is far more easier said than done.
That said I'm sure it'd suck to have to do hard manual labor, have poor living conditions, and have little prospect for anything to change in the future. However, if you know if nothing else I think it might not be so bad. That might be a rash thing for me to say though since I have no experience with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
