The Truth will set you free, or Ignorance is Bliss

[dybo]

I was asked this question in my Humanities class last week, and thought I'd pose the question to you all. The question is: Is ignorance bliss, or does the truth set you free? Please go one way or the other: I know everyone loves the middle ground, but for the sack of discussion, support one or the other. Feel free to use refrences, I know I will.  

[27x]

Well that's vague question. Your teacher probably didn't expect a cetian awnser, but just wanted you awnser in a way that proved you had thought deeply about it.

If anything, I would say it depends on the truth.

When we know something, we can't intentionally un know it without damaging ourselves.

With truth therefore comes responsibility.

The idea is, bliss is fun but you'll never know what you're missing out on; knowing the truth feels rewarding, but sometimes you have to deal with things you didn't want to find out, or that you didn't want to have to keep a secret.  

[Amenubis]

While I know you wanted a firm answer, I don't think it's an "or" question. Ignorance is bliss AND the truth will set you free. They are not polarized concepts that you have to accept one or the other. If one doesn't know that in his bliss, he is living a lie, then it doesn't matter, the bliss is truth to that person at that time.

It depends also on what you are applying this concept to. Did your teacher give any examples?  

[27x]

After thinking about it for a while, I propose this:

Ignorance can't always be perfectly blissfull, it will wear off.

However, the truth isn't the awnser either. Knowing something can't make you permanantly happy.

The idea is, that you can either go on with life, without trying to know anything, or you can use the information you have to your advantage.

With either choice, the whole idea is how you use it. Both are advantageous, so you have to figure out what it is you really want.

Example: You could live as a polititian, and know dark secrets, but you can use that information to rise to power. You could live as a simple farmer, and although you might not nececarily know much about the world around you, you can still live a happy calm life, and teach your children to do the same.  

[dybo]

The point wasn't for the truth to make you happy (it doesn't). The point is that it sets you free. And the more I think about it, the more polarized it seems.  

[27x]

dybo

The point wasn't for the truth to make you happy (it doesn't). The point is that it sets you free. And the more I think about it, the more polarized it seems.

The whole point of being free is that it makes you happy.  

[dybo]

Really? That's news. Where did you get that conclusion from?  

[27x]

I see it this way.

You are trapped in a room, and your close friend is here with you. He says to you,"I have a very dangerous piece of information. Knowing it will allow you to understand things alot better, but it will also give you alot of responsibility. I can assure you there is a big chance that you won't like what I will tell you, but the reward is also great. Before I say anything more, I'll give you the option to leave right now."

Now, the person involved is discomforted at this point, because he has a decision to make. He obviously wants to chose the one that will satisfy him most. Therefore, he is seeking what will make him happy. He probably wouldn't seek freedom in the truth if he didn't think it would make him happy.

Argo, the whole point of chosing to be free, is that you think it will make you happy.

Now, this is circumstantial. There are situations where the choser might agree to hear the truth, knowing it would make him or her unhappy, due to different circumstances.

What I'm saying is, this is the kind of situation I have surmised from the question you presented. And really it's an open question. If you had specified it and given me a scenario, or if your teacher had done so, then it wouldn't be so widly open to opinion.

However, my final point is: A person is presented with two choices, and will most likely chose the one that they think will make them more happy.  

[dybo]

Well yes, that's a given. I'm having a little trouble understanding your argument though, and I don't feel like arguing a strawman, so could you clarify a bit?  

[27x]

It's really not much of an arguement.

A man has two choices. The man is most likely to pick the choice he prefers.

He either choses bliss, because that should make him happy, or freedom in the truth, because that should make him happy.

You wouldn't expect a person to pick one that he or she didn't expect would make them satisfied.

Beyond that, I still don't have any reason why I wouldn't personally pick ignorance.  

[Oniko-inuki]

I think one can only say that 'ignorance is bliss' in retrospect, looking back after you know you can say 'I was happy then, before I knew' but back then the person may not have even recognized his own happiness along with his own ignorance.

Ignorance is bliss only so long as someone remains ignorant of their ignorance. Once it's known that you don't know something it's near impossible to go back to the way things were before. I mean, If you give someone the choice of ignorance or knowledge you've already given them knowlege they didn't have before and contaminated the choice.

Personally, I would rather know, and knowing that there's something I don't know drives me absolutly nuts, especially if it's something that could be important to me.  

[Wings Akimbo]

I'm very much in the 'the truth will set you free' camp. This doesn't mean that I think the truth will make you happier in the short term, but I do believe that truth is fuel for the engine of change. When truth is revealed, on some scale, there is a move towards a more truthful and honest society, more in line with what is really needed.

Truth is power, freedom, and either immediate or eventual happiness or satisfaction.

Ignorance is bondage, and immediate happiness.

I am a firm believer that truth is the greater of the two.  

[Ketsuyin]

If all of mankind had chosen ignorance, then society would never have advanced to its current state. The fact of the matter is, ignorance is bliss, but only when there is someone who knows the truth looking out for you. It's the same principle as a child having parents. The child knows nothing of the world, he is ignorant. His parents know the truth, or at least more truth than he does. It is their decision what to do with that truth, because truth is power. If they use their knowledge of the truth in a negative way, this hurts the child, so the child's ignorance is not bliss. If they use it in a good way, then the child's ignorance is bliss.

So essentially, ignorance is bliss, but it is the duty of a select few to seek truth and rise above the masses to positions of power. It is then their responciblility to use that power to the benefit of all, but oiften they don't. If a person remains ignorant, they may be living a terrible life without realizing it. Is it fun to be a self-sacrficing individual? No. Not at all. But somebody has to do it, or society will never improve.  

[27x]

Ketsuyin

If all of mankind had chosen ignorance, then society would never have advanced to its current state. The fact of the matter is, ignorance is bliss, but only when there is someone who knows the truth looking out for you. It's the same principle as a child having parents. The child knows nothing of the world, he is ignorant. His parents know the truth, or at least more truth than he does. It is their decision what to do with that truth, because truth is power. If they use their knowledge of the truth in a negative way, this hurts the child, so the child's ignorance is not bliss. If they use it in a good way, then the child's ignorance is bliss.

So essentially, ignorance is bliss, but it is the duty of a select few to seek truth and rise above the masses to positions of power. It is then their responciblility to use that power to the benefit of all, but oiften they don't. If a person remains ignorant, they may be living a terrible life without realizing it. Is it fun to be a self-sacrficing individual? No. Not at all. But somebody has to do it, or society will never improve.

Well there are countries that have made many strides in science and medecine, which have communistic laws that prevent news stations from broadcasting anything against the government, and that cencors the internet.

How do we not know that the majority of people now arn't ignorant.

The leaders of all societies have always kept secrests, and their subjects have been none the wiser.

I would say that ignorance actually protects us from destorying ourselves sometime, and in doing so, helps mankind to advance.  

[Ketsuyin]

27x

Ketsuyin

If all of mankind had chosen ignorance, then society would never have advanced to its current state. The fact of the matter is, ignorance is bliss, but only when there is someone who knows the truth looking out for you. It's the same principle as a child having parents. The child knows nothing of the world, he is ignorant. His parents know the truth, or at least more truth than he does. It is their decision what to do with that truth, because truth is power. If they use their knowledge of the truth in a negative way, this hurts the child, so the child's ignorance is not bliss. If they use it in a good way, then the child's ignorance is bliss.

So essentially, ignorance is bliss, but it is the duty of a select few to seek truth and rise above the masses to positions of power. It is then their responciblility to use that power to the benefit of all, but oiften they don't. If a person remains ignorant, they may be living a terrible life without realizing it. Is it fun to be a self-sacrficing individual? No. Not at all. But somebody has to do it, or society will never improve.

Well there are countries that have made many strides in science and medecine, which have communistic laws that prevent news stations from broadcasting anything against the government, and that cencors the internet.

How do we not know that the majority of people now arn't ignorant.

The leaders of all societies have always kept secrests, and their subjects have been none the wiser.

I would say that ignorance actually protects us from destorying ourselves sometime, and in doing so, helps mankind to advance.

I will not deny that there have been achievements from societies and systems of government that do not promote free thought. However, it is not the most efficient way. Take America for example. We are a baby as far as nations are concerned. We've been around for just 233 years, yet in that time we've invented the light bulb, air planes, the phonograph which led to records and CDs and MP3s, the computer, the internet, not to mention thousands of countless other inventions. The fact of the matter is that when people are free to persue their own destinies and follow truth for themselves then society advances. The whole purpose of government in a republic is to make sure people are able to persue their destinies with as few inhibitions as possible.