To fight an enemy properly, you have to know what they are. Ignorance is defeat.
Lawyers are the only persons in whom ignorance of the law is not punished.
An individual is generally ready to admit that he is ignorant of periods in the past or places on the other side of the globe. But he is much less likely to admit ignorance of his own period and his own place, especially if he is an intellectual. Everyone, of course, knows about his own society. Most of what he knows, however, is what Alfred Schultz has aptly called recipe knowledge”—just
enough to get him through his essential transactions in social life. Intellectuals have a particular variety of recipe knowledge”; they know just enough to be able to get through their dealings with other intellectuals. There is a recipe knowledge” for dealing with modernity in intellectual circles; the individual must be able to reproduce a small number of stock phrases and interpretive
schemes, to apply them in analysis” or criticism” of new things that come up in discussion, and thereby to authenticate his participation in what has been collectively been defined as reality in these circles. Statistically speaking, the scientific validity of this intellectuals’ recipe knowledge” is roughly random.
Injustice, poverty, slavery, ignorance — these may be cured by reform or revolution. But men do not live only by fighting evils. They live by positive goals, individual and collective, a vast variety of them, seldom predictable, at times incompatible.
As the origin and basis of all religions, it cannot be the antagonist of any: it is indeed their purifier, revealing the valuable inner meaning of much that has become mischievous in its external presentation by the perverseness of ignorance and the accretions of superstition; but it recognises and defends itself in each, and seeks in each to unveil its hidden wisdom.
Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.
Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious.
The new arguments for rules take an entirely different tack. They are based neither on the ignorance nor the knavery of public officials and, in fact, assume that everyone knows how the economy operates—even the government! Moreover, the government's objectives are assumed to coincide with the people's objectives, and everyone has rational expectations. Despite these seemingly ideal
circumstances, modern critics argue that a central bank left with discretion will err systematically in the direction of excessive inflation. To remedy this distortion, they advocate a fixed rule.
I refuse any kind of support coming from supremacist groups. I recommend that, for coherence, they support the leftist candidate, who loves segregating society. Exploring that to influence an election in Brazil is a big silliness. That's ignorance about the Brazilian people, which is mixed.
Space is as infinite as we can imagine, and expanding this perspective is what adjusts humankind’s focus on conquering our true enemies, the formidable foes: ignorance and limitation.