Is an every expanding knowledge necessarily beneficial?

[Hope]

OK. Intentionally cryptic, but has anyone been listening to 'In Search of Eden' on Radio 4?  It is broadcast at 1:45pm each day, and probably repeated later.  Simply put, the question is whether we sometimes lose important aspects of life when new knowledge arrives.

[jeremyp]

OK. Intentionally cryptic, but has anyone been listening to 'In Search of Eden' on Radio 4?  It is broadcast at 1:45pm each day, and probably repeated later.  Simply put, the question is whether we sometimes lose important aspects of life when new knowledge arrives.

I think an example would be of some use.

[BeRational]

I cannot think of an example where new information would not be useful.

[Hope]

I think an example would be of some use.

If you were to listen to the first 2, 15 minute long, episodes, you'd get a number of examples.  I sent the OP via my phone, so couldn't put a link in - so here's a link to the first Episode with a link to episode 2 within it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07sy5y4

[SusanDoris]

Ever-expanding knowledge will increase understanding that all religious beliefs are products of the human imagination and, therefore, greatly enhance understanding and appreciation of the infinite range of the evolved human mind.

[jeremyp]

If you were to listen to the first 2, 15 minute long, episodes, you'd get a number of examples.

Good you'll be happy to summarise them here so we can talk about them then.

[Hope]

Good you'll be happy to summarise them here so we can talk about them then.

Actually, it would be better if you listened to the material than simply relying on a 2nd-hand account.  Suffice it to say that at the end of the second episode, the suggestion was that the Garden of Eden story was a linguistic picture of the move from hunter-gatherer to farmer and therefore a shift away from such close couumion with nature and today's third episode looks at what we lose when we learn to read and to count.

[splashscuba]

Actually, it would be better if you listened to the material than simply relying on a 2nd-hand account.  Suffice it to say that at the end of the second episode, the suggestion was that the Garden of Eden story was a linguistic picture of the move from hunter-gatherer to farmer and therefore a shift away from such close couumion with nature and today's third episode looks at what we lose when we learn to read and to count.

That's lovely and I did listen to a bit but didn't have the time to finish, so a summary of the points you think are relevant would be good

[jeremyp]

Actually, it would be better if you listened to the material than simply relying on a 2nd-hand account. 

No it wouldn't.

I want to know what your take is, not what somebody on a video says.

Suffice it to say that at the end of the second episode, the suggestion was that the Garden of Eden story was a linguistic picture of the move from hunter-gatherer to farmer and therefore a shift away from such close couumion with nature and today's third episode looks at what we lose when we learn to read and to count.

The first example is interesting because farming is generally related to a worsening of human diet due to lack of variety. People became measurably less healthy after farming took hold. But without farming, nothing of our culture would exist because there would be no surplus to support the academics, the engineers and the artists.

I'd be interested to know what we lose by knowing how to read.

[Hope]

No it wouldn't.

I want to know what your take is, not what somebody on a video says.

But without listening to the material, you won't know whether what I say is relevant to the topic or not?

The first example is interesting because farming is generally related to a worsening of human diet due to lack of variety. People became measurably less healthy after farming took hold. But without farming, nothing of our culture would exist because there would be no surplus to support the academics, the engineers and the artists.

That bears very little relation to what the folk on the pogramme say - so perhaps you need to listen to it before pontificating.

I'd be interested to know what we lose by knowing how to read.

Listen to the programme.  Again, suffice to say that the folk in the episode suggest that our minds become limited in a way.  Illiterate people seem to regard number in a pictorial way, whereas literate folk move to a linear way of thinking.

If you don't want to discuss the ideas, why bother posting in the first place?

[jeremyp]

But without listening to the material, you won't know whether what I say is relevant to the topic or not?

Shouldn't you have constructed your OP so that your comments make sense in the context?

That bears very little relation to what the folk on the pogramme say - so perhaps you need to listen to it before pontificating.

That's your fault for not making your post self explanatory.

Listen to the programme.  Again, suffice to say that the folk in the episode suggest that our minds become limited in a way.  Illiterate people seem to regard number in a pictorial way, whereas literate folk move to a linear way of thinking.

But being able to read and write and count have opened up human experience vastly. I don't think being able to think in pictures is much of a trade off.

If you don't want to discuss the ideas, why bother posting in the first place?

You're the one keeping the ideas a secret.

[Jack Knave]

Actually, it would be better if you listened to the material than simply relying on a 2nd-hand account.  Suffice it to say that at the end of the second episode, the suggestion was that the Garden of Eden story was a linguistic picture of the move from hunter-gatherer to farmer and therefore a shift away from such close couumion with nature and today's third episode looks at what we lose when we learn to read and to count.

That Garden of Eden thing sounds interesting. What the move to agriculture did was to settle us down into larger groups where our ability to relate to everyone was overwhelmed by the sheer size of the social group (usually it is taken that 150 people is the maximum we can adequately relate to). This then required laws to ensure the cohesion of the community but some factor had to be all powerful to enforce the law, hence the idea of some god, which was usually related back to nature (our instincts) which was where we had been operating as hunter-gatherers. 

As for knowledge, all new and significant knowledge will tend to displace some older knowledge. Our hi-tech world makes us very vulnerable if our whole civilisation falls apart. How many of us could grow our own food and hunt down prey?....and defend to the death our plot of land from others. On a less drastic note, often knowledge that gets pushed aside because of some trendy new fad or theory etc. often with time gets re-investigated by someone at a later future date.   

[Hope]

I want to know what your take is, not what somebody on a video says.

By the way, it isn't a video.

[Hope]

... hence the idea of some god, ...

Interestingly, the people interviewed made no such inference, which I did find interesting in view of some of the people I've heard on the subject.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you mean religion, it would be beneficial if it was consigned to the rubbish bin, imo.

Hark....The sound of shrill suburban passive aggression...................which bin would it go in?
Where I am they only empty the purple one every fortnight.

[Sebastian Toe]

Where I am they only empty the purple one every fortnight.

Is that the one that you put all of your excess straw in?

[ekim]

Is an every expanding knowledge necessarily beneficial?

I haven't listened to the broadcast, but I would say that 'knowledge' is neutral and that it is the way that it is used determines whether it is beneficial.  North Korea is expanding its knowledge on nuclear weapons which it may see as beneficial but South Korea wouldn't.  'Beneficial' is often a relative term.