Is Ignorance Bliss?

I had a funny little situation happen today: my mum posted a video of what she felt was a gravity defying acrobatics performance. She was really excited about it and raved about how many times she'd watched it because it was aaaaaamazing!

I took a look, and it was a regular routine, but played backwards. I mentioned that, and I got two kinds of responses: people who agreed with me and confirmed that it was just played backwards, and people who said "Oh, you've ruined it! I thought it was amazing!" As if the revelation of truth had only served to ruin their wonderment.

As Jedi we strive to dispel ignorance in ourselves. But should we try to dispel ignorance in others, too? And if so, to what extent? Are we just going around bursting people's pretty bubbles? Or should we leave people to their blissful ignorance? Do we have a right to introduce people to truths if we know that the truth would make them unhappy (or in the above case, disappointed)? Another example would be telling a friend that their significant other is cheating on them.

For the longest time I thought the bumblebee was defying gravity with its body vs wings dimensions. There were so many good jokes about it:
“You know why the Bumblebee can fly?” “No, why?” “No one told them they can’t!”
Then someone explained to me the specific properties of the bumblebee’s wings – which by the way are awesome – and dispelled the ‘magic’ about it.

This actually serves as a double example. For one, it would not have done any harm to let me believe in this small rebellion against natural laws. It was one of my little wonders, the collective of which I believe to be very much enriching for my live. Secondly, it tightens the view: One less impossibility, one more border that cannot be crossed. Granted, I could take from this as a lesson to look for those marvelous tricks that seem like magic, for the hidden paths to achieve the improbable. Still, it would be easier to believe in the impossible and still try to achieve it.

In the end I guess it comes down to whether it is more important for the other side to understand the underlying concepts that very much make it a thing of possibility or whether it is harmless enough to let them keep a little wonder.

I rarely speak about the bumblebee’s special wings, however occasionally I still do tell the joke.

One would be wise to think ahead, and think empathetically.

Is the topic one that is important enough to inform them about?

Is there more benefit to informing them than not?

Are they the type of person wise enough to appreciate whatever benefits they'd get more than the pains that it would bring them?

But also - should it be up to you to be the one to break it to them?


For example, I have unintentionally influenced some in my past to drop their religious beliefs in god, due to my own urges to "inform them" of facts that would debunk a lot of what they thought had to be true. For some, this can be a very dangerous thing depending on how much they might psychologically and emotionally rely on a perception they grew up with. The point is, whatever you do, be wise about why, when, what, how, and with whom you're breaking a bubble with. All of those conditions play a part in the answer you want about it.

"Disquietude is always vanity, because it serves no good. Yes, even if the whole world were thrown into confusion and all things in it, disquietude on that account would be vanity." ~ St John of the Cross

Sufficient not only unto the day, but also unto the place, is the evil thereof. Agitation over happenings which we are powerless to modify, either because they have not yet occurred, or else are occurring at an inaccessible distance from us, achieves nothing beyond the inoculation of here and now with the remote or anticipated evil that is the object of our distress. Listening four or five times a day to newscasters and commentators, reading the morning papers and all the weeklies and monthlies -- nowadays, thins is described as "taking an intelligent interest in politics." St. John of the Cross would have called it indulgence in idle curiosity and the cultivation of disquietude for disquietude's sake. ~ Aldous Huxley

(to jump on the quote train a bit...)

I saw the same performance, and to me it was obvious that it was in reverse. Physics doesn't work like that, it just... doesn't. I don't feel bad for telling people the truth so they don't look stupid, and everyone here knows my stance on doing your research and checking your sources.

When it comes to special situations like the cheating spouse/significant other, it depends on the individual situation, my closeness to the couple, my motivation, etc. People forget that every relationship is different and that they can include that agreed upon kind of don't-ask-don't-tell dynamic. I know some of mine have, and we were both very happy. Some of the worst damage that can be done is by "friends" who think they're helping. Never make assumptions about other people's relationship. It's obnoxious... and if they wanted you at their party, they'd have sent you an invite.

I've got some quotes, too. :laugh:

“Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully.
"Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever."
"And he has Brain."
"Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain."
There was a long silence.
"I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never understands anything.”

“A clever mind is not a heart. Knowledge doesn't really care, wisdom does.”

“When you discard arrogance, complexity, and a few other things that get in the way, sooner or later you will discover that simple, childlike, and mysterious secret known to those of the Uncarved Block: Life is Fun.”

― Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh


To simply accept reality and not ask "why?" is one of the highest ideals of Taoism. Many people would call that ignorance. The Tao of Pooh talks at length about the difference between approaches. Wise owl, clever rabbit -- neither of them are as happy as the unintelligent, widely ignorant Pooh. If ignorance is bliss, that doesn't make any kind of value assertion about ignorance, bliss, or knowledge.

Leah Starspectre wrote: As Jedi we strive to dispel ignorance in ourselves.

Of course.

But should we try to dispel ignorance in others, too?

Be a good example. Who are you to judge others and impose your judgment/values on them?

should we leave people to their blissful ignorance?

Again who are you to judge they are ignorant or not. Is an ox ignorant and a monkey smart?

Do we have a right to introduce people to truths if we know that the truth would make them unhappy (or in the above case, disappointed)

Who gave you the right? Should you impose your values on others. You know, you believe what is the truth and right for another?

? Another example would be telling a friend that their significant other is cheating on them.

Sure I would if their a good friend.

In my opinion this depends heavily on what we feel about the person in question and about what the subject matter is, too. As social animals we are creatures of habit. If we make it a normal thing to not care about accuracy, if to say "leave me to my wrongness" becomes something trivial to us, what can't we come to believe in this way? How are our peers and loved ones influenced seeing us not caring, too? And what of our children who grow up wishing to be like us?
Now, yes, this is a slippery slope argument, but I'd argue that it is only fallacious if we have no further evidence to back up the assertion of danger implied, and we do. The worse our internal model of reality is at matching the observable reality, the worse choices we end up making and that is perhaps the single most influential source of private and public conflict. Wars have taken countless lives because somebody thought they were entitled to some land, or the rightful appointed of a god or because the local plague was a curse from the neighbor's court warlock.

So what about a benign fake video some unskeptical viewer took for genuine? Well, the principle is the same, of course - the attitude of wilfull ignorance, deliberate uncaring about the reality of the matter (I am avoiding to refer to it as truth) is a dangerous one in principle, albeit not necessarily in practice in this particular case. Frankly to hear someone say this takes much of my respect for them. Being told you are wrong is a gift, an opportunity to become less wrong, a chance to improve in an ever so slight insignificant way. To view it as an attack of any kind is an insult in its own right. In some sense I pity those who need to be deceived in order to be happy. In other ways I can't help but question how much they respect themselves so as to be happier being duped than respected by others.

When we go to the movies these days, most of us understand that no dinosaur we see is an actual animal somebody filmed. Thus if you tell someone that it wasn't, all you can get out of them is something along the lines of "you don't say!". Few would complain about you breaking their immersion. The child that may have believed they actually saw people die will however be thankful that you explained that nobody came to harm and they need not fear anything. We usually don't go into a relationship expecting to get cheated. I think the illusion of a loving partner is far more impactful and important to many of us than the illusion of someone performing some fancy jumps. There is in my humble opinion something severely backwards about thanking the messenger dispelling the former while shooting the one dispelling the latter.

TheDude wrote: neither of them are as happy as the unintelligent, widely ignorant Pooh.

This has been a lifelong source of frustration to me. One does not have to be an idiot to be happy. One does not have to blindly accept anything to be content. What Pooh had was not a lack of intellect, it was a stillness of spirit and a simplicity of motive. He was far wiser than Owl could ever be because he had the ability to listen to his intuition.

I disagree with Hoff's portrayal of this character and of his encouragement toward blind stupidity. If we CAN be more, we should. I will never accept us wasting our potential.