i know it's a catch phrase and all

but if we would like to parrot a saying that truly desires to lessen the amount of ignorance in our lives

wouldn't we have to represent this desire in a better word choice to make it functional

surely the mind would take something that imply's we Deny something that gives many of us "bliss" (although the degree of ignorance in everyone's lives is the key differentiator) as a threat and stone wall this idea in it's track's since the conscious mind doesn't really take well to order's , especially those that rob it off "bliss". I think it would be wise for all of us to also stopped being ashamed of any ignorance they may have. it is not a disease, it is a coping mechanism, and the mind must be offered a better option to change , not try to imagine it is ignorant free!

it may be longer winded but definitely more "functional" to say

open to learning to develop options that are better than ignorance and how could i become happier and wiser from this- ATS

ignorance is a state of not knowing something, the denial of ignorance is really only the process of learning, but more specifically, on ATS, IMO ignorance is denied through open minded inquiry.

ignorance is not shameful, willful ignorance is. if the information is available and we choose not to give it any attention solely because we think it's unbelievable or unpalatable, that's shameful.

i think the motto is quite functional and i think if ATS didn't have it, ATS would be a lot smaller and a lot less enjoyable.

So am I to understand that this is a motion (if such things are weighty in and of themselves) to 'disambiguate' the word "Ignorance"?

We define it inconsistently, seems to be the OP's observation.

Ignorant behavior is different from "ignorace" per se - I can't argue against that. But how does one determine if a person is being 'willfully' ignorant, prejudiced, biased, irrationally dogmatic, or what have you?

[edit on 13-10-2008 by Maxmars]

Absolutely. And I take "deny ignorance" to advocate an activist stance against willful ignorance.

We've known the phrased question, "Is the glass half empty or half full?".
This typifies the polarity of attitudinal we can observe in an authors writing. How they say something can reveal how they face the subject reinforcing the negative or the positive.

I think the phrase "Deny Ignorance" is equivalent to "Half Empty".

That is why I use the "Half Full" equivalent in my graphic.

"Acknowledge Awareness"

Some times how we face a problem can potentate a positive or a negative result.

For example, if you are trying to help someone solve a problem, you don't criticize them for having the problem. You focus on solving it. Anything else is not only unproductive, but injects more anxiety into the process reducing the abilities they might have for finding answers.

You think about this for a minuet and you get it.

If you are not helping a search for solutions, you are adding to the problem.

"Deny Ignorance" is an unproductive attitudinal approach. It gives the impression we must cut off the process of solving the problem by denying it's reality. The better answer might be "Healing Ignorance", or similar.

When our solution is colored by anger, resentment or hate, we phrase with that color staining the words and focusing on the unproductive subject rather than the productive we need to resolve.

If however we use positive expectation, reinforcing a positive solution, our words should be similarly positive and have a better probable result.

When dealing with children one of the worst ways to manage them is to constantly criticize and punish, focusing on the negative, in stead of reinforcing their strengths and rewarding their talents, interests and success.

How many of us remember the teachers who celebrated our talents, and helped us with our problems. I will always remember these people with great love and fond memories. They helped me focus on my good qualities, rather than the negative ones I found I would never be able to change because those problems I had no actual ability. (Story for that.)

Focus on the negative, and you draw in more of same. Many examples and solid physiological, spiritual and practical knowledge show this clearly.


A quote from Mother Teresa when asked if she would join the Anti War movement She was heard to say, and I am paraphrasing, "I wont join an Anti War movement, but will join a Pro Peace movement."

ZG



[edit on 10/13/2008 by ZeroGhost]

reply to post by ZeroGhost

---

Interesting analogy. But, wouldn't "Deny Ignorance" not be "half-full glass" or "half empty glass", but, "what the heck am I drinking out of this glass?"

Denying Ignorance is not the focus of how full or empty the glass is, but, an active investigation to what is in the glass.

In my humble opinion, of course!


Cuhail

The hammer meets the nail, in my opinion.

To me, as I understand the OP, I can't deny ignorance since I know it exists. But I can defy ignorance, which to me would be the claim that what we're drinking doesn't matter by saying it most certainly does.

Vive La Different

I was going to suggest "Think Different", but those rascals at Apple stole my idea before I came up with it.

I am sort of keen on "Springer ROX" for a new catch phrase.

But then I do operate on limited mental faculties...

Springer...

Well we can change the context as you so creatively did , but the initial effect of the phrase would still remain don't you think?

I thought it was funny and relevant your asking what is in the glass. I of course believe this is a true concern, (ie. choosing the lesser of two evils.) but having a grasp of the glass's contents, the phrasing might be a relevant modality to consider a positive rather than a negative.

Of course "Springer ROX" can work too. Depending where the "ROX" are

How about "Ignorance SUX" or "Stupidity is Stupid"?

ZG

[edit on 10/13/2008 by ZeroGhost]

Defy Ignorance would not provide a thorough enough investigation of this matter. By defying something we cast it away and refuse to acknowledge the matter's subtle nuances. To defy is to challenge, to resist boldly the prevailing authority. This, I fear, is too caustic, and only makes us appear to be advocates of our own claims. To deny something is to refuse to agree or accede to that which is "willfully ignorant". This allows us to at least acknowledge the matter at hand, whether we believe it true or untrue, whether we agree or disagree. But, by initially refusing to accept the generally designated truths, and by constantly seeking to reveal those truths, we come to a point in our little society, where the truths of the world are congruent with the truths of men.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by cognoscente]

Of course we could also change it to "deny over-thinking."

Of course some of us (unnamed) deserve that one.

This is another line to supplement the One Line rule.

(BTW, I realized that last line is how you follow the law but not the spirit of the law. Any law students listening?)

Hey! Legal now!

ZG

one line post (RHIP)

S...

Acronym Definition

RHIP Rank Has Its Privileges
RHIP Rank Hath Its Privileges
RHIP Relativistic Heavy Ion Physics
RHIP Rental Housing Inspection Program
RHIP Randolph Health Improvement Partnership
RHIP Rental Housing Improvement Program
RHIP Regional Hearing Impaired Program
RHIP Retirement Has Its Privileges
RHIP Roseville Housing Improvement Plan
RHIP Raven-Hawk International Press
RHIP Rush Hour Information Program (LifeWay Christian Resources)
RHIP Rolling Hills in Pacifica (clothing)
RHIP Robb Hawks International Productions



[modhide]I hope Springer's not retiring or inspecting our houses[/modhide]




[edit on 10/13/2008 by schrodingers dog]

Sorry, I only meant "to stand in opposition of", and certainly only for myself. Not a broad suggestion, just statement of personal philosophy. As is everything I write here. Caustic is something I haven't considered myself. Perhaps that is part of my problem. Over-thinking is almost certainly part of my problem. I'll bear these in mind as I work to "do something about" ignorance. My own, that is.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by TravelerintheDark]

the next paragraph in your post was also good, but i don't think many take it seriously

it's only a motto for the website

the subconscious mind interprets this and pukes.....err pushes back


example
(conscious mind) reads; DENY ignorance processing ....DENY being ignorant /Deny ignorant beliefs....believe i am ignorance free/stop using ignorance as a coping mechanism

subconsious mind ........ya surrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeee


you have to give the subconsious mind an ACCEPTABLE option to replace ignorant beliefs with more aware one's .........and the ignorant belief provides a comfort zone....it serves a purpose.....it will not be denied......without and until you can replace it with a better option that provides a similiar degree of happiness

you should thank your ignorance for keeping you protected from some uncomfortable truths....forgive yourself for needing the ignorance (you were only doing the best you knew how) and you should be open to finding ways to expand your comfort zone and replace some of the ignorance with awareness when your comfort zone can handle it, and remind yourself how much happier you may be if you do this and gain wisdom (some people don't care about truth, just piece of mind) you can decide why you would want truth, not just say you want it like it's a punch line.





[edit on 21-10-2008 by cpdaman]

[edit on 21-10-2008 by cpdaman]

There was several catch phrases that they used before settling on Deny Ignorance...

the famous, Object Ambiguity

the pointless, Obfuscate Authority

the just plain weird, Deny Shemp

But in the end they settled on Deny Ignorance. And it seems to work.

yep, perspective wins again!
or how about " alleviating ignorance" or "escaping ignorance" - with that it would be a progress to being less ignorant.