Is it true that what you don’t know can’t harm you? If so, why? If not, why not?
Infinite diversity in people reveals the fundamental differential nature of us. Thus it is impossible to come up with a universal standard that every one would agree with. Although there are some qualities such as safety, health, beauty and money, that general desirable enough for most of the people to omit the minority, I still believe that the best way to measure one’s well-being is always to personalize to individual experience. Therefore in this essay I shall argue that what you don’t know can not harm you in the cognitive aspect, under the premise of the desire-fulfillment theory of well-being.
Imagine that Anna had a beloved pet dog which she got it in her …show more content…
Things get more complicated when they associate with the mental status. It is not only because that there are usually more than one factors contribute to one specific emotion, but also due to that individuals weigh their feelings in various way. On the contrary, physical damage is relatively effortless to be both determined and quantified.
Another crucial factor is continuity of the issue. The death of the dog is instantaneous and irreversible, knowing that only bring sorrow and decline Anna’s well-being. However, the side effect can be chronic and can be cured if the patient discover the true reason.
Yet, there is always a chance for them to find out the true situation. After all, when Anna is refused to visit her relatives to see her dog for several times, or when the side effect for the patient is too strong to be simply explained by any other reason, they will come to that point to reveal the truths. But it is vital that at the critical point between not knowing and knowing, once he or she finds out the truth and gets hurt by this, the status of ignorance is ended and the new reason (which might not be true neither) become a thing that you already
Infinite diversity in people reveals the fundamental differential nature of us. Thus it is impossible to come up with a universal standard that every one would agree with. Although there are some qualities such as safety, health, beauty and money, that general desirable enough for most of the people to omit the minority, I still believe that the best way to measure one’s well-being is always to personalize to individual experience. Therefore in this essay I shall argue that what you don’t know can not harm you in the cognitive aspect, under the premise of the desire-fulfillment theory of well-being.
Imagine that Anna had a beloved pet dog which she got it in her …show more content…
Things get more complicated when they associate with the mental status. It is not only because that there are usually more than one factors contribute to one specific emotion, but also due to that individuals weigh their feelings in various way. On the contrary, physical damage is relatively effortless to be both determined and quantified.
Another crucial factor is continuity of the issue. The death of the dog is instantaneous and irreversible, knowing that only bring sorrow and decline Anna’s well-being. However, the side effect can be chronic and can be cured if the patient discover the true reason.
Yet, there is always a chance for them to find out the true situation. After all, when Anna is refused to visit her relatives to see her dog for several times, or when the side effect for the patient is too strong to be simply explained by any other reason, they will come to that point to reveal the truths. But it is vital that at the critical point between not knowing and knowing, once he or she finds out the truth and gets hurt by this, the status of ignorance is ended and the new reason (which might not be true neither) become a thing that you already