> knowing how to do what you want to do - Is not the same thing as doing what you want to do, which often requires no knowledge.
Perhaps, Saul, you could demonstrate your own analytic skills by telling us how you might prove an absence of knowledge ? The inability to sufficiently explain what is known? That would certainly eliminate many instances of alleged knowledge -- including the originator of the quote under discussion, Jackson Pollock. Does Ranciere really "dismiss skills that exist outside the specifics of a given task or goal" ? We've had such difficulty defining the tasks or goals of any alleged 'artworks' -- I'm afraid we would have to conclude that skill was irrelevant to their production. I'm afraid that 'knowledge' (as well as 'skill', 'art', and 'image') is one of those difficult words that need to be rushed to the emergency room of the Cheerskep clinic. - consequently I would appreciate it if you kept to your own premise - so perhaps you should take a moment and reflect on what this quote implies - it calls for someone to acquire the ability technical and conceptual through experience and training to accomplish their goal. What he does dismiss is that skills exist outside the specifics of a given task or goal. Your own argument demonstrates just this - your analytic skills are limited to your goal of making a certain argument over and over again without much self-reflection _____________________________________________________________ Click here for great computer networking solutions! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2211/fc/Ioyw6ijncccERbwfDwrOAjrZhmjPSd yCggRm256kVs0fshgXUACM1u/
