“Ignorance is bliss” Everyone says it. But do they really believe what it’s says? Do they examine what they’re saying? The answer is, usually, no. They don’t think about what it truly means because “everyone” else says it and does not think about what it means. As Mark Twain suggests, man, usually, conforms to his society’s views, taking on opinions without rationalizing them for himself.
While in some situations, ignorance can be bliss, we can never be completely ignorant; otherwise we would cease to function. For example, if someone were to be dropped from the sky completely ignorant of everything, he might look at a bus coming down the road toward him and have heart failure. Even worse, he might look in the mirror and kill over, who knows. Okay, now here’s less extreme example. Someone does not know of world hunger organizations. Let’s even go further; they don’t know of world hunger and that people are dying in different countries all over the world. Now, if this person does not know of this sadness, then they won’t be as sorrowful as that of the people that know. But on the other hand, one can argue that not knowing is just as sorrowful as knowing. If one does not know, then they can not help and if they can not help then they are letting people die, when they could be saving lives. Therefore, the question arises, Is it more sorrowful to not help or help? I think most would agree that it is more sorrowful to let people starve and die. In theory, one would be exchanging their happiness for another’s. You would be unhappy because you know, but by helping someone, you make them less miserable. And because your helping someone, you receive joy, most likely, and therefore regain happiness. Therefore, to answer the question plainly, no. I do not believe that "ignorance is bliss" in all cases.
