Apologies for technical problems....
Thanks also to Andrew Stones for the paragraph below. Andrew posted it as a comment on one of my drawings below but I think it relates just as well to my previous post on Virilio's 'sphere' so I'm re-posting here.
'To prove discovery of a previously unknown species, an ornithologist kills and preserves a specimen... but what if it's the last breeding male/female of the species (this could well not be known at time of discovery). The beginning of a new thread of ornothological knowledge might then be contingent on the destruction of the objects to which the knowledge pertains; knowledge destroying, piecemeal, the world in which it holds sway'.
Steve, you wrote in another post , which I cannot find now, so I write here...
ReplyDeleteYou were comparing knowledge to a baloon that was expanding as we acquired more knowledge and the membrane was getting thinner... so we were closer to what we don't know? .. something like that... I found it very interesting and woke up this morning thinking about it... so I was thinking.. Is what we know = to what we learn? and if the more we learn=the more we forget?... I think it is in my case...and if we forget, do we still know...somewhere inside us? and so... the more we know... the more we know what we don't know but also the more we forget so then we really don't know?.... ufff i'm getting very confused here... I better get up.
Thanks for the nice writing.
Joana