A fool's paradox

TheMadFool

''Living in a fool's paradise'' is a well known expression. It connotes the empty joy of an idiot, as seen by the ''wise''. The intent of the phrase can be further bolstered by the expression ''Ignorance is bliss''. Need I say more?

In sharp contrast to the general purport of the above is the supposed ''happiness'' that allegedly comes from knowledge and wisdom. Isn't that why we so feverishly seek both (knowledge and wisdom). Isn't that the whole essence of philosophy and surely, the sharp point of the spear of all human endeavor - be it science, religion, art, etc? Given how much ''progress'' has been made and how ''easier, comfortable, healthier, and happier'' life is now it would be foolish to argue against this view.

All that said, we have a ''paradox''. On one hand ignorance and the accompanying stupidity is a sure source of happiness and on the other hand knowledge and wisdom are also sources of happiness.

Perhaps this paradox is beautifully encapsulated in the famous words of Socrates: ''I know that I know nothing.'' His knowledge of his ignorance was his greatest achievement. How do we make sense of this?

Your views please...

T Clark

All that said, we have a ''paradox''. On one hand ignorance and the accompanying stupidity is a sure source of happiness and on the other hand knowledge and wisdom are also sources of happiness. — TheMadFool

No paradox. Irony maybe. Both willful ignorance and searching for understanding can have positive or negative results. There's a lot going on the world, so we have to pick what we are going to pay attention to. Being ignorant of large portions of existence is inevitable. Excessive observation, explanation, and interpretation can gum up the works. That is a vice many on this web site lean to. There is a healthy balance. It's different for different people.

TheMadFool

It's different for different people. — T Clark

So, you're saying it's a matter of opinion - of a subjective character. Then why all the fanfare about philosophy? Why take the uphill road towards wisdom and knowledge when you could simply plop yourself at the bottom, in joyful ignorance?

Noblosh

↪TheMadFool

Philosophy is about making sense of the world, not about seeking happiness. With his iconic statement, Socrates rejects the validity of everything he knows so that he can engage in the perpetual search for knowledge that is philosophy.

TheMadFool

Philosophy is about making sense of the world, not about seeking happiness. — Noblosh

But philosophy is defined as love of wisdom and love is an emotion which, as far as I know, brings happiness. I think no person would engage in philosophy without it being a happy occasion.

Chany

↪TheMadFool

You're taking the literal definition of philosophy to be what it is about.

You're ignoring the plethora of philosophers who reach conclusions that we would not call happy. These type of philosophers believe what they do not because their beliefs make them happy, but because they cannot follow through with lying to themselves. You might start off with high hopes, but, for a lot of people, once you know reality, you cannot ignore that reality, even if reality is horrific.

TheMadFool

You're taking the literal definition of philosophy to be what it is about — Chany

Perhaps I am but surely you do not believe that a person would engage in an activity that didn't in some sense give the agent a degree of happiness. The irony of course is that philosophers haven't yet found any good reason to be jumping for joy. Quite to the contrary there are many many reasons to be sad - suffering, disease, death, etc. This I think is the curse of any philosopher - to find the journey so exciting and enjoyable and the destination so disappointing. Given that is so I'm still an optimist. I think there's hope for us - we must continue to envision a bright future based on sound moral grounds and have faith in science. In the future (I don't know when) our world may have a place for the ''happy philosopher''.

T Clark

So, you're saying it's a matter of opinion - of a subjective character. Then why all the fanfare about philosophy? Why take the uphill road towards wisdom and knowledge when you could simply plop yourself at the bottom, in joyful ignorance? — TheMadFool

What's different for different people is the balance between ignorance and examination. Different things work for different people.

Why all this fanfare about philosophy? Because we can't help ourselves. The only places there is any fanfare is where people like us congregate. Your question is like going to the Democratic convention and asking why everyone is so liberal.

T Clark

But philosophy is defined as love of wisdom and love is an emotion which, as far as I know, brings happiness. I think no person would engage in philosophy without it being a happy occasion. — TheMadFool

Go through all the posts on the website. I would not call the general tone "happy." People who think too much tend to be a melancholy and self-involved bunch.

T Clark

But philosophy is defined as love of wisdom and love is an emotion which, as far as I know, brings happiness. I think no person would engage in philosophy without it being a happy occasion. — TheMadFool

The etymology of the word "philosophy" is from the Greek for "love of wisdom", but that's not what the word means. Should we define it?

jkop

a ''paradox''. On one hand ignorance and the accompanying stupidity is a sure source of happiness and on the other hand knowledge and wisdom are also sources of happiness. — TheMadFool

I think the first premise is false, ignorance is not a source but a lack of something, and you don't get something from nothing. The bliss in ignorance arises from a sense of continuity and peace, for instance, which hypothetically can be undermined by knowledge about threats or injustices.

The second premise is dubious, because not all knowledge is a source of happiness.

So, there is no paradox.

TheMadFool

↪jkop

You're just playing with words.

To get right to the point what did Socrates mean when he said ''I know that I know nothing''? In my humble opinion his greatest ''knowledge'' was realization of his own ignorance. My question is what made him happy? His ignorance or his ''knowledge'' of his ignorance? Or was he a sad man?

TheMadFool

Go through all the posts on the website. I would not call the general tone "happy." People who think too much tend to be a melancholy and self-involved bunch — T Clark

What do you mean by ''think too much''? Did Socrates think too much?

T Clark

What do you mean by ''think too much''? Did Socrates think too much? — TheMadFool

Would you question what I mean if I say "eat to much" or "drink too much?" People who eat to much tend to get obese, which has health consequences. People who think to much tend to focus on abstractions rather than experience of the physical and social world, which has psychological consequences.

woodart

↪TheMadFool

Philosophy is a process of discovery. It attempts to bring closure to an idea or concept. Philosophy can sometimes bring satisfaction, sometimes even happiness – but – there are no guarantees in the investigation for closure, satisfaction or happiness. Ignorance can sometimes be blissful, but most of the time I think it is just ignorant – and not a paradox.

TheMadFool

Would you question what I mean if I say "eat to much" or "drink too much?" People who eat to much tend to get obese, which has health consequences. People who think to much tend to focus on abstractions rather than experience of the physical and social world, which has psychological consequences. — T Clark

I think there's a distinction to be made between eating/drinking too much and thinking too much. In the former ''too much'' has a meaning - there's danger in excess. However, in the latter ''too much'' lacks this meaning. The danger (if any) lies in the inevitable realization of contemplating our world (it's s sad). The activity of thinking is NOT harmful in and of itself. So, there's no such thing as thinking ''too much''

TheMadFool

↪woodart

Indeed. The universe is not obliged to make us happy.

T Clark

I think there's a distinction to be made between eating/drinking too much and thinking too much. In the former ''too much'' has a meaning - there's danger in excess. However, in the latter ''too much'' lacks this meaning. The danger (if any) lies in the inevitable realization of contemplating our world (it's s sad). The activity of thinking is NOT harmful in and of itself. So, there's no such thing as thinking ''too much'' — TheMadFool

The activity of eating is not harmful in and of itself. You don't think there is danger in excess thinking? I know from personal experience there is. I'm not the only one.

Chany

↪TheMadFool

Some people do think too much, in the sense that they either 1)over-complicate existing issues or 2)completely block out competing views.

Mongrel

↪TheMadFool

I once paced back and forth all night long trying to figure out if the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was moral or immoral.

Out of it fell this notion of pre-event and post-event perspectives. Pre-event is characterized by Eros, a pure drive to live, and post-event is the domain of judgment and morality. I held to that outlook for years, but it started disintegrating in the light of Nietzsche.

I tell all this to explain that I didn't pace that night because I was reaching out for happiness. I didn't have any choice. The question had me in its hands. I was driven to try to understand.

And this is typical of the pre-event perspective: one is driven to act. Morality is about assessing how well it went. :)

Wosret

Haven't we gorged ourselves enough on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

Judging and evaluating constantly without paying attention surely has no drawbacks.

Mongrel

Judgement is one side and Understanding on the other. Spend too much time at either extreme and you become a nutcase.

TheMadFool

↪T Clark

↪Chany

I agree that thinking ''too much'' which I'm translating as excessive physical exertion is harmful to bodily health. However, one doesn't need to think ''too much'' to get depressed. Even a leisurely contemplation of the human condition is enough to darken our mood. Which brings us to my main point - is it better (rationally) to remain in ignorant bliss or should we philosophize?

TheMadFool

↪woodart

Isn't this just another angle on the ''paradox'' of philosophy? While we seek knowledge because it is, to say the least, ''interesting'', the realization we attain after philosophy is not a brightly colored rainbow but a dark and gloomy place.

TheMadFool

I tell all this to explain that I didn't pace that night because I was reaching out for happiness. I didn't have any choice. The question had me in its hands. I was driven to try to understand. — Mongrel

Perhaps you misunderstood yourself. As far as I can see one is driven by emotion - happiness and sorrow being prime motivators.

Mongrel

↪TheMadFool

I gather you've never been possessed.

TheMadFool

I gather you've never been possessed. — Mongrel

:D

A fool's paradox

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions