skandalon

Why does it disturb us that the map be included in the map and the thousand and one nights in the book of the Thousand and One Nights? Why does it disturb us that Don Quixote be a reader of the Quixote and Hamlet a spectator of Hamlet? I believe I have found the reason: these inversions suggest that if the characters of a fictional work can be readers or spectators, we, its readers or spectators, can be fictitious. In 1833, Carlyle observed that the history of the universe is an infinite sacred book that all men write and read and try to understand, and in which they are also written.

✖ Via “Partial Magic in the Quixote” by Jorge Luis Borges, reproduced in Labyrinths: selected stories & other writings, tr. by James East Irby, New Directions Publishing, 2007, p. 196

This could be read as an epigraph to Bertrand Russell’s type theory.

• Jun 11, 2010 link notes tagged: art book novel fiction author spectator reader theater representation reflexivity self-consciousness type token class logic Russell Borges map

I have registered the arbitrarities of Wilkins, of the unknown (or false) Chinese encyclopaedia writer and of the Bibliographic Institute of Brussels; it is clear that there is no classification of the Universe not being arbitrary and full of conjectures. The reason for this is very simple: we do not know what thing the universe is. “The world - David Hume writes - is perhaps the rudimentary sketch of a childish god, who left it half done, ashamed by his deficient work; it is created by a subordinate god, at whom the superior gods laugh; it is the confused production of a decrepit and retiring divinity, who has already died” (‘Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion’, V. 1779). We are allowed to go further; we can suspect that there is no universe in the organic, unifying sense, that this ambitious term has. If there is a universe, it’s aim is not conjectured yet; we have not yet conjectured the words, the definitions, the etymologies, the synonyms, from the secret dictionary of God.

✖ Via “The Analytical Language of John Wilkins” by Jorge Luis Borges. Translated from the Spanish ‘El idioma analítico de John Wilkins’ by Lilia Graciela Vázquez; edited by Jan Frederik Solem with assistance from Bjørn Are Davidsen and Rolf Andersen. A translation by Ruth L. C. Simms can be found in Jorge Luis Borges, Other inquisitions 1937-1952 (University of Texas Press, 1993)

This very short essay contains the famous reference to the bizarre animal classification allegedly listed by an unknown Chinese encyclopedia. Learn more about the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge’s taxonomy on Wikipedia.

The extent to which we do not understand very well what is taxonomy (we all experience certain difficulties when comes the time to classify things : think of your fridge for instance, or the desk you’re sitting at right now) certainly will be reflected in the ways bloggers are going to handle the new custom taxonomy user interface as well as custom post type capabilities within the upcoming WordPress 3.0. For a fun approach of the problems to come, read about Content Post Madness.

• May 29, 2010 link notes tagged: book author list encyclopedia order epistemology taxonomy classification chaos universe Borges animal God religion Hume