We live in an age of instant news and where knowledge resides just beyond the click of the mouse. With all this knowledge available to us why is the united states so far behind other nations in education? What is it that is holding our students back? Is ignorance a choice like my grandfather suggested and we as a people are choosing to limit our knowledge and understanding? Or perhaps it something in our culture and society that persists in keeping us from reaching our full potential? Let me know what you all think.

I think that the difference between knowledge of facts--which is increasingly expanding beyond the capacity of many people to grasp--and knowledge of wisdom is essential. The choice of what things to be cognizant about is self-protecting, for the sheer volume of knowledge is impractical for the mind, and the hours of a real daily life.

As for comparisons of educational rates in various nations, the educational level is not so much of a variance in income levels as it once was. Productivity and profitability determine the value of education when it is applied; failing to be competitive productively zeroes the real value of educational success, unless one goes where the education's value is worth more money.
IMO

it is a govt product

ignorant people are easier to control

yep it's a conspiracy

Ignorance is a disease.

I think you may have a point with this one. So long as profit and productivity drives what makes education succesful then we will be looking at our jobs going overseas as well as the best teachers and educators. What saddens me even more is a sense that our society has lost basic skills like common sense, logic and street smarts. Respect for knowledge and wisdom as a whole seems to be lost on America. What can be done to reverse these trends?

i think ignorance comes with insecurity honestly .. but its not as simple as a one word answer. I think it def. has alot to do with how you're raised.

Heres a scenario .. Jane doe is beaten by her father from an early age all the way into her teen years ( plz ladies this is just for the sake of an example) She eventually starts dating guys and ends up dating the wrong people . after countless encounters she will eventually build this idea in her mind that all men are bad ..and without reading what i wrote previously about jane doe .. her feelings might sound ignorant because not all men are bad or created equal. so thats just an example how a person might develop ignorance for either something particular or just a ignorant mentality in general.

ignorance is a really tough thing to be passive about and it hurts alot of people .. but theres also alot of things that you can't necessarily say is ignorant because thats just the way it is lol.

Religion for example .. personally i find religion to be a hoax and sometimes i feel like people are ignorant for believing in a dogmatic figure, to me its superfluous i think its one reason why theres a lot of war and hate going on in the world . But its IGNORANT to say that religion is ignorance ... get it ?

Your right in the sense that ignorance can be subjective to the circumstances and influences surrounding a person or group of people. In this sense i believe as a people we are programing this ignorance into ourselves and our society. Religion itself is a double edge sword, it has been used for both good and evil. Truth as in all knowledge is like this. Eveything and everything one has the potential to do both, which in a since also says that ignorance is a matter of choice. Is this a paradox or is the nature of ignorance in humans so co-dependent on itself that one state of ignorance in turn perpetuates the other?

Ignorance is simply lack of knowledge.

We're all ignorant until we learn through trial and error.

Its never-ending learning.

SO... We're ALL ignorant.

NO ONE is above the learning curve, therefore NO ONE is in a position to determine any precise ignorance to knowledge ratio in any other person at any given time.

In some instances for me it's a choice.. In my field of work I have learned that I don't really know what is going on in the world, I only know what the media thinks I should or wants me to know.. so unless I can find out on my own, I would rather know nothing at all then what they want me to believe.. I might catch bits and pieces here or there but I don't trust it fully...
In other instances, I like hearing another person's point of view and I'm open to their ideas and beliefs, rather than just be ignorant and close-minded.
I think the easy access to information on the internet is great and being able to research whatever my heart desires. But anyone can post anything on the internet, how reliable is all that information that your trusting to expand your knowledge...

I think this is a very good point. As Splendid said, ignorance is simply lack of knowledge. And if the only source of knowledge you have is feeding you biased or slanted information, ignorance is not so much a choice as it is a result of unreliable sources.

Another factor is the educational system itself. I believe that the "no child left behind" mindset is in large part responsible. Graduating a student just to keep them in the same social clique is counter productive. The actual result is a functionally illiterate citizen that is more of a burden to society than an asset. So instead of "leaving them behind" for a couple years in their youth, you "leave them behind" for their entire adult life.

And of course there are "learning disabilities". Some of which are validly inabilities to assimilate information. And some of which are simply the product of an inability to teach effectively.

for as long as kids would rather play video games instead of reading and studying they are gonna grow up ignernt

and it's too easy for parents to use TV and video games as electronic babysitters

As has been stated, there is so much information available that the most one could possibly assimilate is only a tiny fraction of the whole. So it becomes a pragmatic issue. What do you need to know in order to function? WHich in turn depends on the society in which you live. Knowing how to hunt is of critical importance in a hunter-gatherer culture, but completely useless in an urban culture. Knowing the difference between "there", "their" and "they're", or "you're" and "your" is critical in an academic culture, but completely unnecessary in a text-messaging culture. So really, it comes down to a matter of "cultural integration" when you talk about ignorance in any pragmatic sense.

We watch our Society "leaving people behind" and diagnosing popular "disabilities" (Learning Disability, ADHD, Bipolar Disorder, etc.) resulting in citizens being kept continuously dependent upon Social "Services" as a repeating pattern from generation to generation.

Social Service Agencies contribute only enough monetary assistance to barely survive and little to no further education, resulting in further breakdown of the system (i.e. illegal sales of prescription drugs to "get by" w/ legal ramifications) and little to no viable programs in place to break the cycle.

For some, staying "ignorant" (in this context) seems the only way to subsist.

Bingo!

I know... A bit Off Topic...

But:

If two or more citizens recognize this pattern, perhaps the next step is in creative invention of ideas leading to viable solutions?

I agree that this is the crux of the problem, expectations, and the home life.

Sky, I don't know much about the no child left behind act, can you explain how its a part of the problem?

I don't think it could be considered off-topic to propose a solution to the problem that was presented by the topic.

I think the only true solution to the problem is to remove the incentive. If we reward a thing, we get more of it. If we reward ignorance, we get more ignorance. By rewarding it we are actually encouraging its increase. By supporting peoplefor the sole reason that they are ignorant, we are, in fact, supporting ignorance.

Now I'm not saying that removing the incentive would be an easy thing to do. The take-from-the-rich-to-give-to-the-poor welfare mentality is the "squeakiest wheel" in our entire socio-political system. And as such is the most difficult to change.

But the fact is that the problem will continue to persist unless and until that "reward ignorance" practice changes.

Well Crapola! I just looked it up and it seems that I have been using that phrase incorrectly. Or at least, in a manner that is different from what the offical act itself intends.

My only defense is that the phrase "no child left behind" was used to refer to something completely different when I first heard it in the 80s and I never bothered to keep up with the new meaning. My apologies.

So to clear things up, the meaning I intended refers to a policy of passing students through grades to keep them with their social groups instead of because they had learned the lessons of their grade. The reasoning being that the emotional turmoil of failing a grade was worse than the missing education. In other words, the social standing of the child takes precedence over the academic standing. The results of this type of policy would be fairly obvious I think.

Again, sorry for the misuse of the phrase.

There are some major players involved (like Pharmaceutical Companies) that stand to gain from the take-from-the-rich-to-give-to-the-poor welfare mentality... As long as Medicaid foots the bill:

Pharmaceutical Companies get richer while perpetuating the cycle by pushing medications to "treat" what could, in "reality", only fall under the heading of Social Dis-Ease.

I mean... Have you seen the latest Abilify commercial?!

"If your anti-depressant isn't enough..."

Powerful Pharmaceutical Companies would seem to have an agenda to perpetuate this cycle.