Talk:Ignorance

untitled

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here, but it seems like linking ignorance to George W. Bush might be a NPOV violation unless there's a really specific reason. --SingCal 08:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

There is something missing in this article, such as "ignorance is a state of mind". Then there's also the old saying that goes something like this "no one has control over you but you". In some religions (such as Christianity), it is believed that God gave man (or woman) a choice - to do good or to do evil; hence, the other popular saying "the fall of man". I fail to see how "control", "oppression", "empowerment" and "absolute freedom" are linked to "ignorance". Or maybe, I'm just exhibiting my ignorance on the subject of "ignorance". Paradigmbuff 22:30, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Added: European and Asian cultures praise and reward those who endeavor to overcome ignorance (the fruits of their effort for instance, advancements in the field of Information Technology).Paradigmbuff 02:56, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Merge information from Abuses of skepticism

Personally I don't really know if they go together. Work needs to be done on the article before it can be realistically looked at to merge. The person who tagged it on the "Abuses of skepticism" page said that: "asmost (examples) of this article is about ignorance cloaked as scepticism, but scepticism is completely ditterent, it DEMANDS TESTING..." I have tagged totally so that it can be debated. Radagast83 21:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

If the Pathological skepticism article survives its currect AfD, Abuses of skepticism probably should be merged there (under whatever name it ends up with), not here. Cheers, CWC(talk) 12:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Noticed a major error

This article is the perfect example of Wikipedia's perceived lack of credibility. Word definition should never be subjected to personal feelings. A quick lesson/Google search in Latin or origin of the use of ignorance will show how this article should be completely rewritten and redone. Writing like this leads to further ignorantia to the genuine definition of words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.164.233 (talk) 03:28, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I came across this article and found the reads like an essay and personal research tags. As I began reading the first few paragraphs I saw why. Although the author made some interesting points, they ironically had misdefined the term and of course the bulk of their ideas were based on this incorrect definition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 157.145.220.9 (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

I agree, the article states "ignorance is NOT a lack of knowledge", but according to dictionary.com the definition is: the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.

I also agree, and further, even the cited sources to this article refute the ideas presented in the introduction, and article all together

Trim

I severely trimmed the article because I thought that the content was not appropriate for an encyclopedia. As has all ready been mentioned on this talk page and was put on the article itself in the form of a template, it read like a personal essay. In addition, it was completely unreferenced despite making some very controversial claims. I recommend that the article be rewritten rather than reverting and attempting to find references, or just reverting and leaving the article as it was. However, if someone reverts my edit, I will not revert it back. -- Kjkolb 14:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

opinion?

"Ignorance is sometimes misinterpreted as a synonym of stupidity, and is as thus often taken as an insult, when really it is not".

Some people do find being called ignorant insulting even when they know it differs from stupidity. Try to explain the difference between ignorance and stupidity rather than labeling whats insulting and what isn't.

just seemed like an Ignorant statement to me --Deadlytab 04:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Much is unknown, and thus we are ignorant of it. However, ignorance generally has the connotation of failure to be aware of facts those who are not ignorant are generally aware of. "He is ignorant" means failure to have knowledge skills that are reasonably expected in the relevant context. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Irony

I find it ironic that a lot of people do not know the meaning of the word ignorant, even though they use it a lot. Meaning that they are Ignorant of the definition of Ignorant. MatthewBlacke (talk) 17:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The Reach of Ignorance

Ref: "The role of ignorance", copyright University of Pittsburg Press: "There are as many sorts of ignorance as there are sorts of things to be ignorant about... so even as knowledge knows no bounds, (neither) does ignorance. The price of ignorance in general is incapacity... The person who does not know the combination cannot open the lock."

In many respects, a grasp of the scope of one's own ignorance is even more essential to effectively applied intelligence than is knowledge.

There have been numerous attempts at developing a "taxonomy of ignorance" not referenced here, and this is only one deficiency. This is article is as far from an encylopedic reference on ignorance as it is possible to be. One might even term it "ignorant" in the extreme about its subject matter, but that may be a compliment Danshawen (talk) 22:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)danshawen

Just what is with this word for crying out loud?

Ignore [verb]: To disregard willfully and carelessly.

Ignorance [noun]: The lack of knowledge, understanding, or information about something; the condition of being unaware, uninformed or uneducated; the state of being ignorant.

Ignorant [adjective]: A person in the state of ignorance.

Ignorance doesn't mean ignoring. Ignorance only means lack of knowledge, and has never meant the deliberate act of ignoring, e.g. my ignoring (not ignorance) of my girlfriend's hourly text messages quickly caused our break-up. It is in fact ignore which has changed its meaning over time, and has become rather more deliberate, i.e. one has no knowledge of something because one has chosen to have no knowledge of it. Ignorance has not followed this path.

In conclusion, ignorance and ignorant refer to lack of knowledge, i.e. being simply unaware, whereas the verb form, ignore, has changed over time to refer to deliberately choosing to be unaware, i.e. willful ignorance, conscious decision to not know.

If you describe a person as "ignorant" without any other context you usually mean that they're bigoted/obstinate as described above, e.g. "What did you think of Dave?" "I think he seemed a little ignorant". However, if you use it to refer to a particular context then it can be used (carefully) to describe the simple fact of not knowing, e.g. "How did Dave get on with the customer?" "He was ignorant of their networking requirements".

"Ignorance is bliss" means that lack of knowledge results in happiness; it is more comfortable not to know certain things; what you don't know won't hurt you.

78.167.99.171 (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Question: "Is democracy in more danger from ignorance or apathy?"

Answer: "I don't know, and I don't care."
This article is supposed to be our Article for Improvement.
Let's try to better the effort in 2013. It is a sad article now. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:52, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

My 2¢

Personally, I'd change this article to something like what I have here: User:jkgree/Sandbox/bliss [page to be deleted on approximately 1 May 2020].

I deleted the Thomas Pynchon quotation, though it bore some small degree of interest, because it was not cited, so I have no idea if these are truly his words, and, if they are, whether it was correctly transcribed (which I suspect, based on punctuation, it was not), or even exactly where it ends. I also took the liberty of capitalizing the entry word "ignorance" cited from the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, assuming that that was the intention.

I didn't look through the history of this page, so I'm ignorant about that. - Jkgree (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I expanded the Pynchon quotation in the article space to complete the author's thoughts in his own words, and cited The New York Times. NedFausa (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Response to Jkgree's Sandbox rewrite:

Opening section

Oppose citation needed template at end of first sentence, which presents commonly understood definition of word "ignorant" and needs no reference.

Oppose removal of second sentence from existing article space; it is informative and noncontroversial.

Consequences

Support removal of section heading and the three paragraphs thereunder, except first sentence that, as rewritten by Jkgree ("Though generally seen as negative..."), can continue from opening section.

See also

Oppose removal of Fallibilism and Jahiliyyah; each article is relevant and instructive.

External links

Oppose removal of Ignorance at PhilPapers, which provides a helpful list of related categories. NedFausa (talk) 22:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing and commenting on my mock-up. My responses:

1) Removing "Ignorance at PhilPapers" was an oversight on my part. I meant to just chop off the housekeeping stuff at the end. I honestly didn't look at this reference, so have no opinion about it.

2) NedFausa supports keeping the second sentence. At least, I don't think we need to tell readers that "ignorant" is an adjective. How about: "An ignorant person is unaware...."

3) I am fine with keeping Fallibilism and Jahiliyyah. To be honest, I had trouble understanding fallibilism, and that may have influenced my leaning towards dropping it. But thank you for supporting the deletion of, for example, "Newspeak" and "Hypocrisy". - Jkgree (talk) 14:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

After further consideration, I agree that the opening section's second sentence should be removed. I thought it was useful to describe as ignorant individuals who deliberately disregard information; but without a specific reference, that's disputable. Ignoring something implicitly requires at least superficial awareness of it. NedFausa (talk) 17:53, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Ignoring root words: The definition of ignorance.

  The usual definition of Ignorance is "lack of knowledge or information". "Lack of knowledge of information" would more closely be considered an example of "uneducated". To "educate" someone would be to "give them instruction or knowledge in a particular field". An uneducated person in not deliberately ignoring information, but simply is unaware of the information. 
  The common definition of ignorance,  ignores the root word of ignorance: ignore.  Ignore means to "deliberately not take notice or disregard intentionally".  Ignorance then is to know the truth and choose to deliberately disregard the information. It is possible to educate the uneducated, however it is not possible to overcome ignorance with facts or information if people choose to ignore them. 

Paul R Eitson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.13.135.236 (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)