<DIV><STRONG><EM>Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag@gmail.com></EM></STRONG> wrote:<BR>>So, almost by way of mathematical proof, being knowledgeable is better<BR>>because the range of options open to a knowledgeable person is a<BR>>superset of the range of options open to an ignorant.<BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I apologize, I probably again didn't ask the question properly.</DIV> <DIV>I assumed that knowledge and ignorance must be part of the genes because</DIV> <DIV>some end up being wise while others are very content being ignorant. I</DIV> <DIV>was curious to know if sometimes it's easier being content and have</DIV> <DIV>no stress or being wise and having a lot of responsibilities. (For a </DIV> <DIV>knowledgeable person has a super set of the range of options).</DIV> <DIV>Do you think it is part of our make up or do you think ignorance is </DIV> <DIV>a choice?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Anna</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Let's put it like that:<BR><BR>If you are knowledgeable, you can choose to act ignorant. For example<BR>I know that I should not drink too much but I can choose to do it<BR>because I like it.<BR><BR>But if you are ignorant you cannot choose to act knowledgeable.<BR><BR>So, almost by way of mathematical proof, being knowledgeable is better<BR>because the range of options open to a knowledgeable person is a<BR>superset of the range of options open to an ignorant.<BR><BR>On 3/22/06, Anne-Marie Taylor <FEMMECHAKRA@YAHOO.CA>wrote:<BR>><BR>> >Hypothesis:<BR>><BR>> >I keep asking myself if it's better to be ignorant:)<BR>> >If genes contain certain characteristics of ignorance, wouldn't it be OK.<BR>> >To ask that if genes really do contain ignorance, then it would perhaps<BR>>
>be a needed to a distinct gene for a certain type of people?<BR>><BR>> >Hypothesis:<BR>> >I keep asking myself if it's better to be knowledgeable:)<BR>> >If genes contain certain characteristics of knowledge, wouldn't it be OK<BR>> >To ask that if genes really do contain knowledge, then it would be perhaps<BR>> >be a needed to a distinct gene for a certain type of people?<BR>><BR>> Is it better to be ignorant or knowledgeable?<BR>> Just curious<BR>> Anna:)<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>extropy-chat mailing list<BR>extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org<BR>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><p>
<hr size=1>Have a question? Yahoo! Canada Answers. Go to <a href="http://ca.answers.yahoo.com"><b>Yahoo! Canada Answers</b></a>