SaintChukz:
Do you know it is sheer arrogance to want to force your own beliefs and opinion on others?

SaintChukz:
If truth is to come from only one source, what then is the credibility of such truth when it hasn't been tested by others?

doncheks:
This brings to mind
Slum Dog Millionaire.

SaintChukz:
@ Op...i think in one full swoop you have succeeded in contrasting your own opinion in the initial post. In the opening line you opined that -no knowledge is wasted appears to you as axiomatic and as arguably sacrosanct, and in your last line statement you then went on to say that it would be stellar to have a "smattering" of many things. Now, with emphasis on the word "smattering", i'm trying hard to figure out how you would have done that if no single amount of time was put into it to gather the little knowledge you termed "smattering". Mind you the knowledge of a thing doesn't have to be acquired in full for you to term it actual knowledge. You also opined that having a particular knowledge of a thing that has no modicum or bearing on what the future tends to hold for you is sheer waste of time because you may never get to use it. I would say you were wrong there in that assertion because, how would you actually get to know what lies ahead of you when you haven't even gotten there? Or do you have a foreseer gift of telling what the future will bring? In my own candid opinion, i would rather opine that no knowledge is actually wasted until it is left unused. It has to be so because you never can tell when that little "survival skill" you garnered at one time or the other would become very handy to you at a critical point in your life, so i would rather not dismiss any knowledge no matter how irrelevant it may seem at a particular time on the premise that it is never going to be useful to me, when i know we all live in a constantly dynamic world. Finally, i think it is best to make myself feel "important" at any particular stage in life rather than feel "impotent" at a near unforeseeable stage in the future.

RentedReality:
-----------------------------------------------
For example, I don't see how the knowledge of how to prepare a cake or sew clothes would have a significant bearing on my life if I were a lawyer. This is truer given that I may never get the time to come and be sewing clothes or making cakes for either myself or family.
Even if I would get to use them in future, wouldn't it be once in a blue moon as in Ben Carson's case.

Imagine this scenario: your client who's a tailor commits a crime in his shop and in order to defend him based on a technicality, wouldn't it be useful if you had working knowledge of what he does?

Even if it happens once in a blue moon, the fact is it served its purpose and so therefore was not wasted.

I disagree with your logic, you might have to rethink this.

SaintChukz:
Do you know it is sheer arrogance to want to force your own beliefs and opinion on others? Please define truth for me? What is truth to you may not necessary be the universal truth to others. Stop for a minute and try to view the world through the eyes of others with recourse to your own views. On the pitman shorthand example you cited, what if you are appointed tomorrow to a position in government circles that would require the use of such a skill or is that not a possibility as well? Again citing the example of the relevance of the spanish language vis-a-vis the Hausa language doesn't even hold a bearing on this discussion for the following reasons ; (1) The Spanish language was propagated by Missionaries, Merchants and Slave masters from the Spanish kingdom to several other nations where they traded centuries ago hence the wide coverage of the language, was the hausa language propagated in a such manner? (2.) if you are an indigent hausa born, would you require going through extra-mural lessons to learn it? It is with the coming of globalization that we are now beginning to see the need to learn foreign languages, i once watched a feature on tv where a european man living in Northern Nigeria could speak not only hausa language but also the native indigent language of the people he was living amongst. So it should be same for you, if you will be going abroad, you can always learn the language when you get there, but then when you get back home and you no longer have a need of that language you learnt, would you call it a waste of knowledge? When it wasn't during the period you needed it, so why should it become a waste now that you don't need it? In countries like America and Canada that are predominantly english speaking, do you know that the knowledge of the spanish language would still be an invaluable asset to you, because as far as i know there are still a sizable number of spanish speaking communities in those countries. If truth is to come from only one source, what then is the credibility of such truth when it hasn't been tested by others?

redcliff:


[size=14pt]with this post of yours, its safe to say you are intelligently dumb[/size]

SaintChukz. An adept n succinct verdict!:
@ Op...i think in one full swoop you have succeeded in contrasting your own opinion in the initial post. In the opening line you opined that -no knowledge is wasted appears to you as axiomatic and as arguably sacrosanct, and in your last line statement you then went on to say that it would be stellar to have a "smattering" of many things. Now, with emphasis on the word "smattering", i'm trying hard to figure out how you would have done that if no single amount of time was put into it to gather the little knowledge you termed "smattering". Mind you the knowledge of a thing doesn't have to be acquired in full for you to term it actual knowledge. You also opined that having a particular knowledge of a thing that has no modicum or bearing on what the future tends to hold for you is sheer waste of time because you may never get to use it. I would say you were wrong there in that assertion because, how would you actually get to know what lies ahead of you when you haven't even gotten there? Or do you have a foreseer gift of telling what the future will bring? In my own candid opinion, i would rather opine that no knowledge is actually wasted until it is left unused. It has to be so because you never can tell when that little "survival skill" you garnered at one time or the other would become very handy to you at a critical point in your life, so i would rather not dismiss any knowledge no matter how irrelevant it may seem at a particular time on the premise that it is never going to be useful to me, when i know we all live in a constantly dynamic world. Finally, i think it is best to make myself feel "important" at any particular stage in life rather than feel "impotent" at a near unforeseeable stage in the future.

SaintChukz:
@ Op...i think in one full swoop you have succeeded in contrasting your own opinion in the initial post. In the opening line you opined that -no knowledge is wasted appears to you as axiomatic and as arguably sacrosanct, and in your last line statement you then went on to say that it would be stellar to have a "smattering" of many things. Now, with emphasis on the word "smattering", i'm trying hard to figure out how you would have done that if no single amount of time was put into it to gather the little knowledge you termed "smattering". Mind you the knowledge of a thing doesn't have to be acquired in full for you to term it actual knowledge. You also opined that having a particular knowledge of a thing that has no modicum or bearing on what the future tends to hold for you is sheer waste of time because you may never get to use it. I would say you were wrong there in that assertion because, how would you actually get to know what lies ahead of you when you haven't even gotten there? Or do you have a foreseer gift of telling what the future will bring? In my own candid opinion, i would rather opine that no knowledge is actually wasted until it is left unused. It has to be so because you never can tell when that little "survival skill" you garnered at one time or the other would become very handy to you at a critical point in your life, so i would rather not dismiss any knowledge no matter how irrelevant it may seem at a particular time on the premise that it is never going to be useful to me, when i know we all live in a constantly dynamic world. Finally, i think it is best to make myself feel "important" at any particular stage in life rather than feel "impotent" at a near unforeseeable stage in the future.

Serendipity:
Undoubtedly the saying that no knowledge is wasted appears axiomatic and arguably sacrosanct.
=
In his book ''Think Big'', (pp. 200-212) Ben Carson argues that you never can know what you will be doing fifteen years from now hence one should grab every available knowledge.
=
He cited an incident where he was before an interviewer who mentioned en passe that he had heard about a concert and he also quipped that he too had heard about it which visibly left the interviewer surprised and they then started discussing classical music..
He contends that that knowlege of classical music was instrumental in his success in that interview.
=
=
MY OPINION
Methinks that having or acquiring some knowledge is sheer and utter waste of scarce time and resources.
-----------------------------------------------
For example, I don't see how the knowledge of how to prepare a cake or sew clothes would have a significant bearing on my life if I were a lawyer. This is truer given that I may never get the time to come and be sewing clothes or making cakes for either myself or family.
Even if I would get to use them in future, wouldn't it be once in a blue moon as in Ben Carson's case.
---------------------------------------------
In high school, I was very good at the use of Pitman Shorthand. An aeon has elapsed since I left junior secondary, and I have never got to use not even a vestige of the knowledge I acquired in that subject.
=

Again, acquiring some of this otiose and apparently irrelevant knowledge may be at the expense of knowledge which would have been more apt and handy. In other words, you may be wasting time acquiring knowledge that has not even a modicum bearing on your life or knowledge you may never get to use due to your discipline.
=
At any rate, I suggest that it would be stellar to have a smattering of many things.
=
Your methodical views are welcome!

Now how do you reconcile the example of Pitman Shorthand that I cited with your rejoinder?

Dereformer:
@ all above me;

Too much grammar!

oluxy:


Having knowledge on first aid, is it a waste to know or does it not concerned any disciplines?


Having d knowledge doesn't implies you must work with it. You may have the knowledge of how to sew a cloth yet you are a lawyer but someday; when your tailor or designer sew less satisfactory cloth for you; you would beable to correct he/she that; this is how you should have done it. Put this like this, remove this and adjust this like this.

You are able to know that because you had once been and have the knowledge.

Having knowledge on something implies an ability to know positive and negative, good and bad, conscious and unconscious, design etc on it just incase such thing occures in future.

The american soldiers are trained on and to have knowledge on medical, geographical, war, capturing, swimming etc.

oluxy:


Having knowledge on first aid, is it a waste to know or does it not concerned any disciplines?


Having d knowledge doesn't implies you must work with it. You may have the knowledge of how to sew a cloth yet you are a lawyer but someday; when your tailor or designer sew less satisfactory cloth for you; you would beable to correct he/she that; this is how you should have done it. Put this like this, remove this and adjust this like this.

You are able to know that because you had once been and have the knowledge.

Having knowledge on something implies an ability to know positive and negative, good and bad, conscious and unconscious, design etc on it just incase such thing occures in future.

The american soldiers are trained on and to have knowledge on medical, geographical, war, capturing, swimming etc.

Meklex:
Some knowledge are sheer waste putting into consideration the opportunity cost involved, just in the case of our universities, where you offer some courses of zero relevance to your chosen field.
I believe so much on the concept of specialization, even our professors adopt the same concept (professor of a specific area of study)..
That's exactly the reason why the American kid knows what he wants in life and specializes on it to attain success.
Concentration breeds success.
Quote for the day: you can't be white and black, you're either white or black.

smurfy:


Looks like you're all about your life. Has it occurred to you that one can gain knowledge with the sole aim of helping others? Your knowledge of shorthand, for example, got 'wasted' because you wanted it to. Someone could've learned that skill from you. Truth is knowledge can't be categorized as useful or more significant. To do so is to make yourself an enemy of true knowledge.

Serendipity:


Get the logic guy. I don't mean that you can never use that knowledge. The question is this ' how often will you get to use it. I might get to use that knowledge of shorthand once in 10 years. That's bad investment guy as I could have used the time and dough expended on that for other stuffs that will be easily handy and relates more to my profession.

secretcode01:
Knowledge is power! But it depends on the kinda knowledge you got and the importance of it.

spinna:
If knowledge is not consciously used it is unconsciously used, interacting with and influencing knowledge that is currently being used.

All knowledge is good because u never know when u'll need it .eg the ability to swim or ride a motorbike may seem irrelevant till some emergency makes that formerly "useless" knowledge the difference between life and death.

Knowledge is power, the more u know, the stronger you are.