Do people not have the right to try to understand?

WISDOMfromPO-MO

Isn't it reckless and irresponsible to act without understanding the best that you can?

Maybe I haven't read enough Foucault. Maybe the book that covers all of this has already been written.

But while we in the "developed world" supposedly highly value truth, objectivity, the exercise of reason and critical thinking, etc., and while we see other people as being pathetic, superstitious narrow minds not interested in truth, we make it extremely difficult for people to function intellectually.

Conservatives who would like to ban books, eliminate the humanities from higher education, etc. do not have a monopoly on anti-intellectualism. Liberals, it is becoming increasingly clear, apparently do not really believe in the Enlightenment/modernist subject who objectively uses his/her reasoning faculties to seek and find truth/reality. If you question their concepts, theories, ideals, values, beliefs, etc. (patriarchy; moral progress; democracy; equality; unearned privilege; separation of church and state; the non-personhood of a fetus; etc.; etc.) you will not be met with encouragement to fully develop your insight, share your thoughts to a larger audience in the free marketplace of ideas, keep up your effort to resist dogma, etc., etc. Instead you will be branded a "misogynist", "homophobe", "racist", etc. Instead you will be marginalized; met with ad hominem attacks and other illogic; told that you are a horrible, sorry excuse for a human being; etc.; etc.

Who would have thought that in a civilization that supposedly celebrates the individual and free speech, free inquiry, rationality, objectivity and reason, etc. it would be such a crime to ask questions, look for better explanations/ answers, hold people accountable, etc.?

I can't remember the last time I saw somebody high five another person for coming up with his/her own idea. I can't remember the last time I heard "Thank you for asking this question" directed towards anybody. I can't remember the last time I heard "I can tell that you have put a lot of thought and work into this question/problem". I can't remember the last time someone focused on the positive qualities of an idea, written work, etc.--said "I am not going to be a teacher with a red ink pen and find all of the flaws, logical fallacies, and other shortcomings. I am going to be a cheerleader and highlight the courage, inspiration, spirit, powerful insights, etc. that characterize this work". Can you?

It's like the thought of a person, gasp, humbly trying to listen, better understand, better appreciate, and gain more wisdom about things is foreign to the overwhelming majority of people.

dclements

I agree that people have the right to know/understand the world they live in and to be able to think for themselves but it is wise to also understand that in the world we live in that is not only not really possible but not even remotely possible considering the amount of things we have yet to learn and teach people, and the very limited resources we have in comparison to what would be required to get closer to some ideal.

To the best of my knowledge the advancement of science, technology, knowledge, etc is a painstaking iterative process that moves very slowly unless there is some major break through to advance it, or some disaster that sets it back.

When we are kids we are told that these advancements come easy and when we grow up and don't see some of the advancements we think should happen as kids have happen yet it is easy to think that people are not trying enough. However the truth is what we were told as kids is really at best half truth, and the people in the position of doing research are more often then not doing their best and it is more or less the same with those who help fund such projects. Obviously having more geniuses doing research and more funding going to research (as well as teachers and their funding for teaching the public as a whole), but such additional help is more of by chance then something than some that can be done in the context of what is already being done. Of course this may not be what you really mean by "people have the right to understand", so I can not say it is a given that it is an issue for what you are arguing.

Also it is plausible that there are other....paradigms that could be used then the one we have, but finding this paradigm, getting existing institutions to want to use it,and then going about actually changing these institutions to use such a paradigm doesn't seem like an easy task either. Or at least that is what I believe IMHO.

Nils Loc

The problem is that I can at any moment be seized by the absurdity of life.

Imagine a being sitting at a computer (?) somewhat incapacitated by the illusion of his or her choices. What ought I to do at any moment (tell me, command me, provide me a God that screams "thou shalt")?

Somewhere Wosret said something about specialization and it is trying to weigh into this post right now.

If specialization is called for, we have to abandon all routes that distract us from that aim. Suppose I've been tasked with building a bridge across a body of water by a certain date or otherwise I'll be killed. If I indeed am motivated to avoid death (and the threat is real) I'll drop everything that I'm doing here and set to work on trying to get that bridge built (according to whatever specifications are demanded of me).

If nothing is demanded of me and my desires are disordered, well then... I think I'll just fart around here. I'm free to be mediocre. Hurrah!

What if I had to pass a difficult test to get into the forum. Uh Oh!

BC

Isn't it reckless and irresponsible to act without understanding the best that you can? — WISDOMfromPO-MO

Of course it is. But there are several reasons why understanding isn't wider and deeper.

1. It isn't "necessary" to have "understanding". If you want a decent job it's necessary to have skills, like knowing how to do lab work or write a business plan; it's necessary to have knowledge about information and how to get it when you need it (for some specific job-related purpose).

2. There are certain habits which make understanding more or less likely. Reading widely contributes to understanding. Playing video games does not lead to understanding (of much beyond playing video games). Spending lots of time following Facebook traffic, watching hours of YouTube, twittering away about trivia, doesn't lead to understanding. Engaging in more substantive YouTube titles could help deepen understanding.

3. The primary task of most of the people in industrialized countries (not just western ones) is to consume. Advertising and social media will teach you everything you need to know about being an avid consumer. Consumption does not generally lead to understanding.

4. Work generally does not lead to understanding. It squeezes the life out of people and leaves us with little appetite for intellectual activity.

5. Knowledge production is difficult. Discovering or producing new information is hard work and problematic. For instance, tons of experiments that researchers do in the lab do not yield consistent results. Still the experiments have to be done, tweaking this factor and that. It's tough. It's just as difficult to produce new knowledge in the humanities.

It's like the thought of a person trying to listen, better understand, better appreciate, and gain more wisdom about things is foreign to the overwhelming majority of people. — WISDOMfromPO-MO

Yes, it is. But let's not dump on all 7.2 billion.

A lot of people have their hands full taking care of their families--and not just 3rd world peasants. A lot of people don't have the intellectual or material resources to pursue knowledge. If you didn't go to school, no matter how bright you are, you are missing an important intellectual resource. If you can't afford books, films, plays, various tools of amateur science, etc. you won't get too far.

The people who should be dumped on are the ones have have no excuse -- maybe 2 billion people. They have the intellectual and material resources to pursue knowledge and understanding, but they don't.

So, somewhere between 2 (you and me) and 2 billion people --- what number would you propose --- is the number of people who actually are getting knowledge, wisdom, understanding, the big picture, the whole kielbasa?

TheMadFool

↪WISDOMfromPO-MO

I think it's more of a duty than a right. Reminds me of Kennedy's quote ''ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country''.

Do people not have the right to try to understand?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions