Again, following on from clarity.

In 1894 Gustav Klimt was commissioned to do three paintings for the University of Vienna entitled Philosophy, Medicine and Jurisprudence.

This is the picture he presented for Philosophy:

The philosophy professors were outraged when they saw this and refused to accept his paintings. They wanted an image showing “The triumph of light over darkness” and instead Klimt had given them this opaque ‘deliquescent triangle’ of bodies drifting about and into each other surrounded by a void. I see this as a wonderful summary of how I see philosophy and knowledge, it’s beautiful, captivating and mysterious and I feel like I am growing in some way as I explore it, but on the other hand it’s a mess, no matter how long I examine it I am not going to be able to pick up any clear and distinct forms; not only that, but the ideas and shapes I see now will change over time as I myself grow and change.

The original painting was destroyed by the retreating Nazis in the second world war, the above is a photograph (hence the black and white). This seems a pretty fitting end for the painting. Not only is knowledge this vague phenomenon, but it’s not immortal. Just as the classics were lost in the dark ages, if the Nazis had succeeded a great deal of knowledge would have been forgotten or discarded. We know of a significant number of books by Greek thinkers that have been lost, considering the impact Plato and Aristotle have had on our modern thinking, who knows how the direction of our learning would have been affected if these books had survived? In the same way it’s likely, if not inevitable, that at some point in the future a great deal of our current knowledge will be lost, and in a few billion years time it’s almost certain that all trace of humanity will be gone and all our ideas will just be floating around in Klimt’s void.