Monday, September 11, 2006

Innocence or Insight

A very interesting article on the tradeoff between innocence and insight: Innocence Versus Insight: (From the link on MR), it's worth a few minutes to click on the link.

There seems to be a fundamental tradeoff between innocence and insight. This tradeoff occurs at both personal and social levels. Adam and Eve are said to have lost their place in Eden because they ate from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil;" their knowledge cost them their innocence and comfort. Our insight often comes at a similar price.

Innocence seems to be a potentially attractive kind of ignorance. Apparently, in many social contexts ignorance can be a good thing, in part because helps to preserve idealism. Idealism is a simplified view of the world that supports optimism about the abilities or motives of oneself, one's associates, one's groups, and of related social processes.

...[I]n societies with strong arranged marriages, the marriage relation is more innocent. Married people there have not had several deep and perhaps sexual relations before they are married. This supposedly helps spouses become more deeply attached to each other, with fewer threats from other past or future or concurrent relations. This attachment comes at the cost of less exploration, which presumably means partners are not as well matched with each other.

...[S]omeone who has had little contact with other nations or cultures might find it easy to innocently presume that his nation and culture are superior. Because of this, in some places those who travel may be suspected of being less loyal to associates and the local community, and of being more at risk of adopting disapproved foreign attitudes and customs. In other places, travel may be celebrated, because those who travel more show they have more social contacts, wealth, and knowledge of the world, while those who travel less appear dull and timid.

...[W]e can see that idealism, a simplified optimistic vision of abilities and motives, can help one to become more deeply attached to associates and groups. This innocence often comes at the expense of insight however, and people often prefer to signal that they have the ability to gain insight.

...[T]here are always things we could do which would teach us more about ourselves, our local associates and community, and about how much we approve of local customs and mores. If we take such actions, we may gain the benefit of insight, but we may run the risk of seeming less attractive and attached to our associates, and of becoming less bound to common mores.

Inquiring minds want to know. Innocent minds might not want to know.


My natural bias is in favor of insight at the cost of innocence, or mayby I pretend to be this way? The puzzle is that I have a very inquisitive mind and at the same time that I tend to be optimistic toward life and the outside world.

1 Comments:

At 12:05 PM, Blogger Li Jin said...

Quite an interesting article although I don't 100% agree that there is necessarily an equal tradeoff between innocence and insights. Sometimes, getting to know more may confuse people who don't have the capability (yet) to process the extra information and thus make reasonable judgments. In other words, insight is not necessarily the sole product of shovelling off innocence through greater exposure to the unknown world.

On the other hand, I totally agree that the courage and willingness to get to know more are crucial for a person to become more insightful. It is simple. You have a clearer view of your position in a certain surrounding, regardless of whether it is a local community, or the earth, or even the universe.As a result, we may end up clinging more to our concurrent surroundings or deviating to develop a more independent identity. In any rate, idealism and optimism may not be the descendent of naive innocence.Insight may not be traded off for innocence, either.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home