Reply to comment

The more we discuss Flatland, the more I realize what a great book it is. I love the chance that it gives the reader to glimpse into another dimension. A thought that has sprung up since discussing Flatland and the dimensions, aside from Antonia's smart or pretty dilemma is the idea of objectivity. In the last few weeks, we looked at how an anthropologist "ought" to look @ things and report them. Me being me, I immediately questioned why he "ought" do any such thing. Now, I am recalling a thought that Paul threw into our class discussion when we were trying to consider other dimensions, namely alternate/parallel/other universes. He said something about how in one universe, the story includes Ashton, but in another it might not/does not. I'm wondering if this might reflect back into the question of objectivity. Could looking at something objectively be like trying to think in another dimension- one in which you (your judgements, your bias, etc.) do not exist?