Skip to main content

Pick Your Poison

 Would you rather find out that your significant other is cheating on you or never find out? Though very far away and presumably irrelevant to your and my current circumstances, this question raises an issue that's not so far from what we know: Is ignorance really bliss?

Sure, I typically respond to the opening question by selecting the latter choice of oblivion as I imagine the pain and hassle it entails, but after I contemplate and fight my instinct, I choose the wiser option. The more daunting one. I choose to pop the bubble of ignorance and learn the truth.

Let's break it down. Your significant other is cheating on you. This action may be a result of a few reasons, the major being dissatisfaction in the relationship and/or sole disloyalty and a lack of integrity. A cheater is prone to cheating more than once, and if one continues it may just be a sign of bad character. Do you really want to be with someone who isn't committed to you? Someone who doesn't find satisfaction in your shared relationship? Someone who ignores basic morality? But let's say you insist on blissful ignorance. Even if you were to stay clueless, however, your partner would likely be affected by their own actions and the relationship could eventually deteriorate naturally. Chances are this relationship isn't successful or fulfilling, so challenging the issue head-on merely saves time and long-term struggle with someone who brings you harm.

Now that we've analyzed a hypothetical situation and its many deviating hypotheticals, let's take a look at how preferable knowing the truth really is. 

In "Saving Sourdi," Nea digs into her sister Souri's situation. With her genuine care for Sourdi, Nea will go to any extent to save her. From a single phone call, Nea was put into a state of alarm crying, "'Well, don't you think she might be in trouble?... It's not like Sourdi.'" (Chai 122) Even as she's left in a state of semi-oblivion, she makes assumptions that cause her to struggle and eventually attempt to save Sourdi. Read this response to hear from Chai herself why she chose to leave Nea in the dark.

https://mayleechai.wordpress.com/2008/12/08/more-questions-on-saving-sourdi/

Even if we pretend that Nea had never heard the phone call, we can't ignore Nea's pre-existing concern and suspicion toward Sourdi's husband. Who knows what later events would trigger the same reaction? Considering Nea's feelings for her sister, it's better that Nea knows the truth for her own ease and for Sourdi's well-being.

However, you may argue that in Oedipus' case, oblivion is the overwhelmingly favored circumstance. Prior to this revelation, he basked in glory and peace as a result of solving the riddle of the Sphinx, being crowned king, and marrying the queen of Thebes. It seems so easy to have never uncovered the truth, yet at the same time, it seems inevitable. As he intended to run away from his fate, instead, Oedipus ran to it. Being crowned king and his other successes simply abled Oedipus to uncover the truth. And with a persistent character comparable to Nea's, the course of events was streamlined with ease. Obviously, the story ended horrifyingly with the death of Jocasta and Oedipus' blinding, but in this case, the truth was unavoidable.

Both Nea's and Oedipus' stories fall short of being the perfect example of mythifying how ignorance is bliss. Their imperfect plots and distinct personality traits raise points of personal discretion to determine what's better, but ultimately they're both connected by the inevitable. If it's eventually going to happen, why lengthen the process and complicate the issue?

~


Interrupting this segment with recent news, last September was the warmest month on record worldwide, the world set a single-day worldwide record in new coronavirus cases last Thursday, and Delta is to affect the Gulf Coast as a Category 4 hurricane this week. For more global problems that you probably have no idea about but will probably be burdened by, check out this link: https://www.globalissues.org/. 

After periods of only browsing through Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok as my modes of information (though not necessarily educational...), when I return to reading actual news I'm bombarded with everything wrong with the world. My uncontrollable response: a sinking feeling, a pit of despair. Definitely more concerned than before for the state of the world, I still resort to reading the news because it affects me and my environment regardless of my awareness or not. As Jordan B. Peterson, a Canadian psychologist, explains:

    You are going to pay a price for everything you do and everything that you don’t do. You do not get to choose to not pay a price. You get to choose which poison you are going to take. That’s it.

Sure, knowledge comes with an extra burden, but that knowledge enables. It opens doors for change, allows for growth, and, frankly, saves time from the inevitable.


P.S.
If you're still unsure about it, refer to Peterson's most valuable pieces of advice. I think the first one will give you the confirmation you need. 
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-valuable-things-everyone-should-know/answer/Jordan-B-Peterson 



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Welcome Back

Every meeting, email, or letter begins with a greeting. "Good morning," "hello," or "dear *recipient.*" Only once an opening has been made can the intent of communication be addressed. However, though unnecessary in content, such polite phrases serve to transition and maintain friendly relations beyond just solemn work. In Korean, the staple greeting comparable to "hi" or "hello," literally means, how are you? However, no one interprets it that way or responds to the question. Despite not staying true to its meaning, it is a necessary means of easing into the meat of a conversation. Very isolated from the other employees, I often found myself asking for favors or questions at work without saying "hi" or "how are you" first. I noticed I was disrupting their work and disregarding their existence as a person and instead only seeing them as a source of inquiry. By bypassing any greeting, any conversation becomes too a...
5 comments
Read more

The Fiction of Eye Contact

This picture makes me so  uncomfortable.  While it's eye-opening to find reason behind the normalities of point of view in film, the eye-level shot appears far from normal in my eyes. Is it the purple suit? The hands crossed? Or the specific positioning of the viewer on a table that makes me so uneasy? It's probably a combination of my suspicions, but I've decided that to its core, it's the eye contact that creates my discomfort. Most of these types of shots never reach the extent of eye contact. Instead, the similarity in levels creates a feeling of similarity shared by the character and viewer. There is no power disparity, no difference in viewpoint. Look at Forrest Gump and this eye-level shot (note that he's not looking at you). But once eye contact comes into play, the connection is too strong. Of course, any good producer will aim to form a connection for an audience to a film. However, there's comfort in a screen lying between a film and its viewer. It...
Post a Comment
Read more