Philosophy Now Forum

Hi everyone,
I hope you all very well.
Assume there is someone who don't know there are variety of different food, different vehicles etc. And of course we know. Should we inform him/her about them.
She/he is enjoying his/her simple life with eating and drinking dairy products and riding donkey. And we know there are other choices but she/he doesn't know. Should we inform him/her?
Happy to see your valuable opinions
Thank you

I got a mouse, he hasn't got a house I don't know why I call him Gerald.
He is getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.

You're the kind of girl to wish it were my world.
I'll give you anything, everything if you want thing.

"Bike" by Pink Floyd on the album "Relics" released in 1971.

Animal_k6 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:15 am Hi everyone,
I hope you all very well.
Assume there is someone who don't know there are variety of different food, different vehicles etc. And of course we know. Should we inform him/her about them.
She/he is enjoying his/her simple life with eating and drinking dairy products and riding donkey. And we know there are other choices but she/he doesn't know. Should we inform him/her?
Happy to see your valuable opinions
Thank you

Successful persuasion is possible up until a certain stage of development. After that stage habits take over and people start wearing the Been There Done That T-shirt on the way to the dinner table.

Folks become woke to what they like. Incoming persuasion frequencies are received as either affirmations or challenges to that wokeness.

The same capacity that permits affirmative philosophical reasoning to be premised upon a necessary, assumed-to-be-true hypothesis, can also be corrupted during the course of the proof by subsequent hypotheses that are actually nothing more than unexamined assumptions.

Examining each assumption used in the reasoning to prove the OH, within the context of the hypothesis presentation, requires the tedium of systematic philosophical thought, which will eventually expunge the psychological corruption right out of those buttressing assumptions, thus unfolding the proof (either refutation or affirmation) for what was at first merely the assumed-to-be-true hypothesis.

'Can' you?

Sure.

'Should' you?

Nope.

Animal_k6 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:15 am Hi everyone,
I hope you all very well.
Assume there is someone who don't know there are variety of different food, different vehicles etc. And of course we know. Should we inform him/her about them.
She/he is enjoying his/her simple life with eating and drinking dairy products and riding donkey. And we know there are other choices but she/he doesn't know. Should we inform him/her?

There were all these Africans, herding cattle, hunting okapi, having skirmishes, raising and razing empires, without a clue that Our Saviour had died to redeem their sins. Some of us decided it was our solemn duty to inform them that there was a better choice than paganism. Now they have borders drawn by European invaders to fight over, AIDS, coffee plantations to work on, diamond mines to die in, the detritus of apartheid, arms merchants, national debts, corrupt dictators propped up by foreign powers and ivory poachers. Lots and lots of choice.

ignorance is bliss... why spoil it?

-Imp