Bunch of things; eta, I so agree with your first post! I read, and think, oh, I want to respond to that, and then, ooh, I have to respond to this, and then, no, I have to read to the end... As a matter of fact, I am typing in an e-mail, just so that I can see the posts without clicking back and forth.

by, yes, this is a very interesting thread; I thought, when I started the conversation one, that it was high time we had another good discussion here.

I notice also that some people approach a conversation the way evangelists approach my front door.
Once again, Keith, you made me laugh out loud--I can just SEE what you're talking about!
Also--now I want to know your definition of wisdom, please, if you don't mind.

I agree with yours and eta's opinion about honest ignorance and on what it is; and in most cases, I don't think people should be blamed. I don't think it will come as a surprise to many here that I keep myself willfully ignorant of Shakespeare. Yes, it causes me to miss a fair number of references, but it just plain is not worth it to me, to try and wade through all that, which for me is nearly as difficult as another language. I am very much an "asker" (also no surprise to some here), but if there is something I don't know to ask about... You have to be aware of something before you can ask about it, 99 or so percent of the time.

I also couldn't agree more that you can't solve a problem if you don't really know what the problem is --much of the time. Partly because it's true, and partly because that is my learning style. I have difficulty, sometimes, in understanding parts of things unless I have first seen the whole (which, I suppose, might explain my need to keep going back so I can see your entire set of posts). I would strongly have preferred, before ever doing anything on my computer, to have a complete understanding--make that awareness--of everything it can do. However, that too would have been more of an effort than I was willing to make. But I have since discovered things that, had I known of them earlier, would have saved me both time and aggravation; and I am quite sure there are many more of which I am still unaware. But, back to problem-solving; let's say that my toilet keeps running. I go to the hardware store, the guy tells me I need to replace this doohickey, and I do: problem solved, and I have no real understanding of what I have done. But if the same thing recurs, I'll know what to do next time. However, if I develop a chronic ache in a strange place, I don't want the Dr. to just give me painkillers--I want her/him to figure out what's causing the pain, and fix THAT. And in that instance, I'll usually understand the problem, as well as the solution. Sometimes throwing a bridge up works; sometimes it doesn't.

About doubt, per this discussion: perhaps a better word might be question. This is not at all the opposite of blind-faith acceptance and belief. Doubt kind of implies that you DISbelieve what was said. You seem not to have disbelieved your math teachers, but you did need to question them; not to disprove what they said, but to further your own understanding.

Helen, your post indicates a pretty dim view of managers. I'd like to think most are better than that, but. I hadn't realized people do things like that (working deliberately slowly) on purpose. (Well, I guess that's another one of those willful-ignorance things; *I* don't do that, so I don't like to think that others do it, either.)