Interestingly (prior to reading your refs)I have just used the Newton-Relativity contrast to illustrate embedded domains on the "self" thread !
Note that ignorance
has its roots in the verb "to ignore" which can be taken as a willing
disregard of "established knowledge" as opposed to being unaware
of that knowledge. A pragmatist would argue that "knowledge" is about "what does or does not work in a particular context", and that distinction overrides antiquated distinctions between "appearance and reality". So at one level of "ignorance" (that of being unaware) there may be an entrenched concept of "reality" and what is uncertain
about it, but at the second level , ( that of willful disregard) there can be a recognition of different contexts and the selection of what can be considered "factual" for specific purposes.
The argument that "facts" are contextually constructed (from the Latin facere
) itself renders arguments about "absolute knowledge" and "ultimate reality" either vacuous or a subject of religious speculation.
So in answer to the question "is it virtuous to admit ignorance ?", my answer would be yes from the willful
point of view, provided that the speaker understood the constructionist argument about "facts". It is not virtuous to admit that ultimate
truth or reality is "inaccessible" because that presupposes their "existence".