Is the term ignorance in denial of it's own

ignorance presupposes awareness. A definition can't have awareness of itself so, no.

(March 26, 2010 at 11:46 pm)deicide110 Wrote: Is the term ignorance in denial of it's own?

Yes; it's a relative term and of limited practical use. The human being (and any other animal) who knows enough to survive long enough to reproduce has all the knowledge he needs.

Henry Ford said that when he needed expert knowledge, he hired an expert,as do we all to some degree. Knowing where and how get what we need is part of our knowledge base.

I use the term 'willful ignorance' to describe those who do not know and who are unwilling to learn. I include new earth creationists in that group.

Am I ignorant? Hell yes! The older I get,the more I learn and the more ignorant I become.

How exactly is a term or definition self-aware enough to be ignorant padriac?

if we consider the definition of ignorance in terms of those not willing to learn or listen, then i think the term is justified. But if the term is used in any other way (for example calling someone blind because they refuse to except our belief) are we not then being ignorant in ourselves.

(March 27, 2010 at 12:05 am)tackattack Wrote: How exactly is a term or definition self-aware enough to be ignorant padriac?

I probably expressed myself poorly,and am not sure if I'm capable of expressing myself clearly,I'll have another go:

'Ignoarance' is a relative term.The closest we come to a person who is 'not ignorant' is th polymath,or the Renaissance man. However those terms are only relative to other in the same broad.

In accusing another of being; ignorant,I'm implying I am not,which is untrue. Hence I;m denying my own ignorance. I hope the reasoning is clear,even if you disagree.

I welcome correction of any error of logic,but not so much an argument about the truth of my premise ,which I assert as true only for the sake of argument.

No I understand and follow both of your logic. That wasn't the original question though.
What he asked is can the term ignorance deny it's own ignorance. Which of course is ridiculous or ludicris I won't put the picture!

(March 27, 2010 at 1:48 am)tackattack Wrote: No I understand and follow both of your logic. That wasn't the original question though.
What he asked is can the term ignorance deny it's own ignorance. Which of course is ridiculous or ludicris I won't put the picture!

Oh. I seem to have missed the point entirely.

Have I mentioned I'm just a poor old pensioner and easily confused?


PS: It's redical-----errr radastam--err----ridicular--err-stuff it!-----it's silly.

(March 26, 2010 at 11:46 pm)deicide110 Wrote: Is the term ignorance in denial of it's own

'it's' : it is

its : possessive

''The human being (and any other animal) who knows enough to survive long enough to reproduce has all the knowledge he needs.''...What about something for the end of the journey? To ease the fear.
''In order for a man to know how to live, he must first know how to die.'' The Book of Dying. (Tibetan Book of the Dead)
''In accusing another of being; ignorant,I'm implying I am not,which is untrue. Hence I;m denying my own ignorance. I hope the reasoning is clear,even if you disagree. '' Clear enough for me, and I agree.