Could ignorance be bliss?

Remaining uninformed seems to have become a badge of honour for many; but it could be that there are upsides to being oblivious

by Renata Salecl

In the early 20th century, American anthropologist Paul Radin studied the Winnebago tribe of Native Americans, which consisted of two moieties living in the same village. Radin was surprised to observe that these two kinship groups described the structure of the village in very different ways. When he asked his informants to draw their settlement, the members of one group presented the village plan showing houses positioned in a circle, whereas the second group drew the houses in a diametrical way, with an imaginary divide between the two moieties crossing the layout of the village.

When Belgian-French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss analysed these drawings, he reasoned that the key question was not what the actual plan of the village was, but instead why the two groups perceived the reality so differently. He said that the difference in perception needed to be understood in the context of the complex relationships that existed between the two groups. Members of the groups tried to conceptualise this complexity according to their position in the social structure. Even more importantly, depending on their particular perception of what their village looked like, each moiety was able to regard itself and the other moiety as either central or peripheral, and to retain their status.

Today, it seems that we are living in a world that is observed radically differently by people who live in the same place. In the US, the Republicans and the Democrats see their own country, as well as the world, in opposing ways. In the UK, supporters of Brexit and its opponents paint an image of their country as if they live poles apart. In Australia, it is as if the government, together with other corporate climate change deniers, does not see the reality of the devastation that massive fires have brought to the country.

Although negation, denial and ignorance are nothing new, they seem to be in overdrive at a time when information has never been easier to obtain. The massive amount of information that is available to us has, however, contributed to tunnel vision, information bias and bubbles. These amplify people’s discord about what their social reality looks like, what counts as fact and what is scientifically proven knowledge.

The development of genetics, neuroscience and big data has changed our perception of what can be known about the individual. Big data, in particular, has opened up new types of anxieties. It is hard to comprehend such a huge amount of data and to process issues around who has access to it and how it might be manipulated. With the emergence of new types of data in the domain of medicine, the question ‘to know or not to know?’ becomes of vital importance for the individual.

In the second half of the 20th century, French philosopher Michel Foucault wrote at length about the interrelation between power and knowledge; today, the link between power and ignorance demands our attention. We are increasingly dealing with what sociologist Linsey McGoey calls “strategic ignorance”, where those in power intentionally play with keeping people in the dark. A particular kind of ignorance is also embedded in the so-called knowledge economy. Joanne Roberts and John Armitage, scholars in the domain of management studies, have rightly renamed this as the “ignorance economy”, since it relies on so many strategies that limit access to knowledge, from patents and copyright to opacity regarding big data.

If one throws into the mix of these power-related strategies of ignorance the problem of individuals who are, in our highly unequal society, struggling for status and recognition, the question becomes not only what people take as truth, but whether they care about truth at all. In the most recent edition of RSA Journal, Michael Bang Petersen presented the research he and colleagues had conducted into people who use the internet to spread fake news, conspiracy theories or politically motivated attacks. Interviews with these people revealed that they did not believe the stories they were sharing were true. What mattered to them was provoking anger, with some respondents saying that they enjoyed the chaos they created. The researchers reasoned that this need for chaos is, for some, linked to the loss of status, the feeling of being left out in our highly unequal society.

In my forthcoming book, A Passion for Ignorance, I look at the connection between two different meanings of ignorance. One is related to lack of knowledge, or, in some cases, the lack of desire to know. The second meaning involves people’s relationships with one another; for example, when we ignore and do not want to notice a certain behaviour or a person, or feel that others do not notice us. Both meanings involve people’s passions.

Psychoanalysis has, from its beginnings, looked at our troubled relationship with knowledge. French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan coined the term “passion for ignorance” to describe the way his patients seemed to do everything they could to avoid acknowledging the causes of their suffering, even though most — if not all — of them came to him claiming that they wanted to know what lay behind their pain.

Passions are also involved with the meaning of ignorance in its intersubjective dimension; as a strategy of ignoring, not acknowledging. All kinds of negative emotions might be stirred when we feel ignored or when we actively ignore others. The people who share conspiracy theories which they do not think are true might very well feel ignored in their lives, or hope to gain recognition through their actions.

Ignorance is also an essential element of more positive passions, such as love. We all know the saying that ‘love is blind’. When we elevate someone to be the object of our affection, we are aware that we are, to a certain degree, glossing over their less attractive aspects. Love, however, is not blind simply because of the fog-like fantasy that we create around the person with whom we are falling in love. Ignorance, or blindness, is at the very core of emotions that love invokes, including seeing in the other a quality that they do not in reality have.

People have always found ways to close their eyes and ignore, deny or negate information that they find traumatic. What has changed in our ‘post-truth’ times is the rise of cognitive inertia; an increase in indifference concerning questions related to truth and lies. This turn to indifference is linked to an inability to know, rather than a simple lack of willingness to learn. Social media and the vast potential for manipulation that exists online contribute to this inability to know. Even more importantly, there has been a change in the perception of subjectivity. As I tried to show in my previous book, The Tyranny of Choice, neoliberal ideology has contributed to the anxieties people face as they try to deal with demands such as ‘be yourself’, or ‘love yourself first’. No matter how hard we try to rationally figure out who we are and what we desire, our unconscious (as well as social pressures) easily undermines our efforts to follow these slogans. At the same time, taking them seriously can contribute to indifference and ignorance towards others.

Confucius said that real knowledge pertains to knowing the extent of one’s ignorance. Thomas Jefferson continued this line of thought, saying: “He who knows best knows how little he knows.” One simply cannot imagine today’s politicians making such an admission. In former socialist countries, political leaders always reminded pupils that they needed to study hard. Both Lenin and Tito were known for finishing their speeches to students with the slogan: “You have to learn, learn, learn.” Few current world leaders would praise knowledge so highly as to make a slogan out of it. Instead, some take pride in how little they know. Paradoxically, being ignorant in the present day and age is something one can become famous for. For Donald Trump, for instance, ignorance is an asset; many of his supporters identify with him in his lack of knowledge and lack of shame about it.

In our daily lives, ignorance might be life-saving, in that it can help us to deal with traumatic knowledge that we cannot easily comprehend. However, when ignorance is cherished as an ideal among those in power, or when denial becomes embraced as a strategy so as not to acknowledge devastating realities such as climate change, ignorance becomes a political factor, and ceases to be bliss.

Related posts:

Today we can monitor sleep, count our steps, record our heartbeat and even text our doctors — all with a click. Thanks to intuitive design, individuals are equipped to take ownership of their health…

It would be easy to assume that everyone knows what a hashtag is by now, but just in case here’s the simplest explanation we could come up with. Hashtags are made when using the symbol # with a…

Despite the misconception of many people, it is not only citizens of the Russian Federation who may engage in entrepreneurial activity as an individual entrepreneur. Foreign nationals have the right…