Individuals can expect that you are a "fool" in the event that you don't talk, since it can appear as you don't know anything or have an assessment, however if you truly are a "fool" then it is ideal to keep noiseless in light of the fact that when you talk you will simply demonstrate them right.
I believe that if you are uninformed on a subject it is ideal to be quiet and learn then attempt to feign your way through. Yet, I don't as a matter, of course, believe that you ought to hush up about your lack of awareness, attempting to conceal it. We shouldn't be hesitant to concede that we don't know something, and in the event that we are sufficiently agreeable for individuals to know, then we can make inquiries and take in more adequately.
For whatever length of time that you are attempting to learn, I don't believe that you ought to be viewed as a 'simpleton', in spite of the fact that that is the thing that the term is by all accounts utilized for. No one can know everything, we are all "blockheads" on specific subjects, yet it is the way we react to these territories of obliviousness that makes us who we are. Likewise, somebody can know a considerable measure and still not utilize it appropriately. It is ideal to know little If you don't have anything to say, you are not taking an interest effectively in Logos, or dialog/rationalization, i.e., the communitarian formulaic occasion termed "talking."
At that point, in the Presence of the individuals who Know, standing up of turn or making Truth-claims demonstrates to one is fooling, as one keeps not/will be not the Living Word. With genuine Teachers, any basically true question is welcome, substantial.