Can we know only what we are prepared to know?

[coberst]

Can we know only what we are prepared to know?

If an individual has never learned to add and subtract that individual cannot learn how to divide and multiply.

Our American educational system, K-12, attempts to teach minimum fundamentals that prepare an individual to function within our high tech society. Our colleges and universities generally augment these fundamentals with some form of specialized knowledge that will make it possible for graduates to obtain good jobs.

Few graduates from our American educational system are prepared to comprehend the very complex type of problems our society encounters. In a democracy such as ours the citizens can choose the politicians to act as their representatives in government. In a democracy such as ours the citizen can veto any public policy that they do not comprehend even though it might be necessary for the survival of the American culture and perhaps even of the survival of the human species.

Under such circumstances is a democratic form of government adequate?

If not what form of government is adequate?

Is it possible for us to educate citizens to the higher level of sophistication that is required to manage a sophisticated high tech society such as ours?

[robertlc53]

-Can we know only what we are prepared to know?

yes one can only know what they are prepared to know. there is no knowledge without acceptance. for example, a piss poor relationship could find both individuals clamoring toward an unforeseeable and likely impossible bright future because neither wants to accept the reality of it. They are only 'prepared to know' the reality of a piss poor relationship as the result of fears of loneliness, etc. thus one must prepare themselves to be open to ideas foreign to their current zone of awareness if they truly desire some other zone of awareness.

-Few graduates from our American educational system are prepared to comprehend the very complex type of problems our society encounters. In a democracy such as ours the citizens can choose the politicians to act as their representatives in government. In a democracy such as ours the citizen can veto any public policy that they do not comprehend even though it might be necessary for the survival of the American culture and perhaps even of the survival of the human species.

this seems a pretentious thing to assume in my opinion. i think your arguments are melodramatic and childish. america will survive until a stronger country overtakes it by force. such is the spirit of democracy ingrained in american culture since the eighteenth century when the british became overbearing and unnecessary.

-Under such circumstances is a democratic form of government adequate?

absolutely. by nature a government is an institution where certain freedoms are sacrificed for the benefit of its sovereignty as a whole. therefore you pay taxes and cops will protect you from a maniac with a sawed off shotgun.

-Is it possible for us to educate citizens to the higher level of sophistication that is required to manage a sophisticated high tech society such as ours?

the output of a device is directly proportional to the input of said device. device bearing broad interpretation and meaning, democracy allows the individual freedom. said individual can educate themselves (with all the tax funded libraries) on world culture, history, politics, the classics etc. this individual would then become sophisticated as i presume this to be your defenition of the word. however this individual is still just a member of a society where every other individual has the same oppurtunities barring birth defects and freak accidents and such. therefore i believe that culturing a population of sophiticates as you put it, is subjective in the individual's interpretation of the word, and is also an oppressive form of forcing one to be a certain way, which is counterproductive to the liberties we enjoy in the greatest country of America.

[coberst]

I am convinced that we cannot "see" that which we are not prepared to "see"; metaphor ‘know is see’.

It is like walking in a forest such that we are unable to see very far because the trees restrict our view. We can use the analogy of walking in the forest, which to see beyond the surrounding trees we must have the means to climb a tall tree to see a bit further.

Perhaps we might extend the analogy to say that we must have some means to raise our self above the surrounding clutter before we can see a bit further. Only when we find a hill with tall trees and climb one of those trees can we see the mountain ahead, which we might climb and see a mountain range in the distance, which we might travel too so that we can see even further. But as long as we do not climb some trees we cannot see beyond the mundane appearances of our little world of trees that surround us.

[robertlc53]

-Can we know only what we are prepared to know?

yes one can only know what they are prepared to know. there is no knowledge without acceptance. for example, a piss poor relationship could find both individuals clamoring toward an unforeseeable and likely impossible bright future because neither wants to accept the reality of it. They are only 'prepared to know' the reality of a piss poor relationship as the result of fears of loneliness, etc. thus one must prepare themselves to be open to ideas foreign to their current zone of awareness if they truly desire some other zone of awareness.



you pretty much repeated what i just said coberst

[weltanschauung]

-Can we know only what we are prepared to know?

yes one can only know what they are prepared to know. there is no knowledge without acceptance. for example, a piss poor relationship could find both individuals clamoring toward an unforeseeable and likely impossible bright future because neither wants to accept the reality of it. They are only 'prepared to know' the reality of a piss poor relationship as the result of fears of loneliness, etc. thus one must prepare themselves to be open to ideas foreign to their current zone of awareness if they truly desire some other zone of awareness.

-Few graduates from our American educational system are prepared to comprehend the very complex type of problems our society encounters. In a democracy such as ours the citizens can choose the politicians to act as their representatives in government. In a democracy such as ours the citizen can veto any public policy that they do not comprehend even though it might be necessary for the survival of the American culture and perhaps even of the survival of the human species.

this seems a pretentious thing to assume in my opinion. i think your arguments are melodramatic and childish. america will survive until a stronger country overtakes it by force. such is the spirit of democracy ingrained in american culture since the eighteenth century when the british became overbearing and unnecessary.

-Under such circumstances is a democratic form of government adequate?

absolutely. by nature a government is an institution where certain freedoms are sacrificed for the benefit of its sovereignty as a whole. therefore you pay taxes and cops will protect you from a maniac with a sawed off shotgun. <----- LOLOL

-Is it possible for us to educate citizens to the higher level of sophistication that is required to manage a sophisticated high tech society such as ours?

the output of a device is directly proportional to the input of said device. device bearing broad interpretation and meaning, democracy allows the individual freedom. said individual can educate themselves (with all the tax funded libraries) on world culture, history, politics, the classics etc. this individual would then become sophisticated as i presume this to be your defenition of the word. however this individual is still just a member of a society where every other individual has the same oppurtunities barring birth defects and freak accidents and such. therefore i believe that culturing a population of sophiticates as you put it, is subjective in the individual's interpretation of the word, and is also an oppressive form of forcing one to be a certain way, which is counterproductive to the liberties we enjoy in the greatest country of America.

oh jeez when did this turn into an eulogy to the moribund US, are you a spy or something. give me a break, who cares about patriotism, the most primitive not to say annoying form of childish hubris. its like getting cocky when your team wins even though you dont even play the sport, but you happened to be in front of the tv. and quite frankly, i think that flag rag is blocking your short sighted polarized sunglasses, dude. hint, more sartre, less dr.phill, for goth's sake.

[blazeofglory]

In point of fact we can not know what we are prepared to know, and can know what we are not prepared to know.

For instance, we are prepared to know about God, heaven and afterlives but we can not know despsite our great inquisitivenesses.

And there are other phenomena but natural or man made and we can know about them. Even we do not want to know about some persons but we hear them mentioned.

We do not want to take interests in others' businesses but we can not help knowing about them in point of fact.

We can not make out this notion exactly.

In fact we are prepared to know lots of things. I am prepared to know the whole idea of quantum physics, yet it is out of my comprehension.

I want to commit to memory so many hymns. I am prepared to know all these stuffs but I can not.

This validates the point that our preparedness has nothing to know all we want in life.