Without being overly dogmatic I think we can break students into these two categories: the ignorant and the stupid. Let me first say that we are all students of some kind and so we are all more or less ignorant and stupid. For the purposes of argument I submit that ignorance is not knowing, yet realizing we don’t know. Ignorance entails recognition of itself. Stupidity, on the other hand, is not knowing, yet thinking we do. Stupidity is clueless as to its own cognitive limitations. Ignorance, aware of itself, is curable and with effort turns into knowledge and eventually wisdom. Stupidity is chronic and like an infection breeds more of itself. Humility arises from ignorance, and this leads to the possibility for change and growth. Thus, ignorance coheres with a will-to-self-development and emerges as the root of all learning. The ignorant student knows that he or she is not fully complete and strives to fill the breach with skills and ideas. The stupid student cannot believe in self-cultivation because he/she sees him or herself as a finished product. Stupidity breeds a sense not of humility, but rather indignancy and self-serving immediacy. The ignorant student approaches study with a sense of gratitude; the stupid student views study with an attitude of spoiled resentment. The mindset of the ignorant student is one of eager meekness; the stupid student suffers from a withdrawn arrogance. The ignorant student will courageously persevere like an infant learning to walk, accepting challenges and learning from mistakes; the stupid student does not have the patience for the slow cultivation needed for intellectual growth and will seek shortcuts such as cheating, quitting, or blame-shifting. Now, these categories are not fixed character traits, but states that change through life with maturity and experience. Socrates said that his wisdom was limited to an awareness of his own ignorance: for your part my friends nosce te ipsum.