What do you think the statement, "knowledge is dangerous", really means? This was brought up by my social studies teacher, and we had quite a fun debate about it. So, it does have something to do with social studies =D.
Knowledge is not dangerous, Curiosity for Knowledge is dangerous. I've seen my brother play Dead Space, that is an example. Also, on our quest to discover life in Mars we could discover something we are not supposed to, or maybe in order to seek knowledge of Dark Matter we could destroy our planet.
Knowledge is neither good nor evil. Knowledge is utterly central. It acknowledges both good ends and bad ends, but by itself holds no partiality to either side. Now, people can hype up certain types of knowledge to be bad. Apparently, knowing how to open up the Command Line is evil-hacker knowledge to about 90% of my student body population at my school. Some people claimed that radon-infused water was good for your health back in the early 20th century.
Knowledge is power. If you want to use that knowledge for good or evil, that's a different story. Knowledge cannot be contained.
People are dangerous. Technically existing is dangerous, because if you don't exist than no harm can befall you. I think it's more likely i'd get killed by an ignorant man person than an knowledgeable one. (The times they are a-changing.)
well..i hear what your all saying about how knowledge cant be dangerouse its the people etc.. but tht may not be totaly true..i mean a gun is still dangerouse no matter who holds it good or bad right?? so is it not the same for knowladge? after all having the knowledge to be able to make a bomb or somthing like that is still dangerouse wether u deicde to make one or not. the person that holds this knowledge wether the person is good or bad still has the knowladge to make somthing that can kill hundreds of people. a good person can posses dangerouse knowledge. another example would be a good person knowing the insides out of a places security due to working there..he can be manipulated into using that to bad ends it does have somthing to do with the people i wont deny that but knowladge can be dangerouse even if left idle in my opinion another quick example here..and everyday mechanic has the knowladge to do all sorts of dangerouse things to a person car to make it skid out or even expload the mechanic may not do that but he still has the knows how
A gun can injure or kill yourself or other humans, but it can also be used to hunt for food. If the person who has the gun is a responsible individual, then it's a great benefit. If it's a psychotic person, well... But that's the case with knowledge. Nuclear power can be used to generate cheaper electricity, but it can also be utilized to kill thousands of people. Lasers can be used for burning information to discs, but it can also be used by to blind others. Cars can be used to travel faster, but it can also be used as a murder weapon (it's basically a giant, slow bullet). Saying that all knowledge of anything is dangerous, and that we should ban the learning of it? I'll use an example I go through daily to explain to others my goals. I'm an 'independent security consultant'; more or less, it's a nicer way to say that I break into computer systems. A bad person with my knowledge could potentially break into computers that I could. But that's where the similarity ends. I never look at confidential data, or make that confidential data available to public. I never penetrate computer security unless the organization that I'm testing knows that I am testing it. My goal in breaking into systems is to patch them up, so that people with my level of knowledge or lower cannot get into it. But what you're claiming is that by keeping dangerous knowledge from happening altogether, then we'll have a safer system? You're targeting the wrong thing. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. What if I got hit by lightning while walking with an umbrella? Ban umbrellas! Fight the menace of lightning!(cite: Little Brother, Cory Doctorow) It's basically what the RIAA is doing. By banning more beneficial services such as Napster, the RIAA basically outlawed media file-sharing. But that wasn't the problem. The problem did not stem from P2P connections; it stemmed from the pirates. If you outlaw guns, then only the outlaws will own guns. If you outlaw alcohol, then only the outlaws will have alcohol. If you outlaw dangerous knowledge, such as being able to break into computer systems, then only the bad guys will know how to break into computer systems. If it's illegal to know how to make a secure system, then the few that do will all be classified as bad guys, while the few within the few that are bad guys will still be able to get into these insecure systems? The Crypto War back in the 1970's illustrated this: The Clipper chip is the best example of the worst idea possible. They wanted a way to be able to get into your encrypted data. That's not privacy or security at all; you're getting pseudo-security. I see backdoors get hacked all the time by password guessing. And how long would you think it would be before the key got leaked? To sum it up, knowledge is a dynamic creature. Halting it forces the good guys to not be able to make knowledge better, while allowing the bad guys to utilize knowledge in order to exploit the rest of us.
i ge thwat your saying..so basicaly if they outlaw some of these things and only the bad people have this knowledge then the good people cant do anything about it since they dont have a clue what they are doing anyways
There's an interesting book (and a movie) called Angels & Demons, and its premise is anti matter and how it can be used for good and how it can also be used to make extremely catastrophic tools of war. If anyone likes the subject of "knowledge is dangerous" I suggest you read the book or go out and see the movie, the book has some key points of "knowledge is dangerous."
"If you hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil," you will probably never write a best selling novel.....but anyway, I hear that this is referring to knowing evil. If you don't know of evil how can you commit evil? This is used against Christianity in the garden of Eden story a lot. I will just point out that God gave them the option, presented evil as a choice, so they might love him freely [the story goes]. Then Adams sin trickled down to all of us because sin spreads through the male. If the Dad is sinful so is the child... Not starting a debate, I'm just saying that is the majority of Christian's view on the subject. And thank you so much aMeoba for making me look like an idiot in the other thread with that link in your sig, thanks a bunch.
Well, I would say it means that knowing too much can be dangerous. Specifically mentally dangerous. If I knew that a comet was hurling towards our planet, I would most likely go in a state of panic. Knowing too much could make you obnoxious as well, and nobody likes an obnoxious douche. Another example of the dangers on knowledge is nuclear weapons. Knowing how to do something and doing it is two different things. Although they have benefited us, they could be the cause of our downfall. I would like to know.
A comet is hurling towards our planet right now! (well maybe not a comet but a meteroid) The odds that our planet will not be hit by a space rock is much more unlikely than the opposite happening. That meteroid could hit us in 100 years, or maybe later, but eventually it will hit us. I don't know if you are asking a question in this last paragraph. Please clarify.
I was trying to make an ironic joke by saying "I would like to know". I'm not to good with jokes. A meteoroid isn't really a threat. An asteroid is a different story.