when it comes to knowledge i'm an authority. i know all there is to know about knowledge. i'm speaking from personal experience. first hand experience is how you gain knowledge. i know because when it comes to knowledge i'm an authority. when it comes to the subject of knowledge theres no one more knowledgeable. and i'm willing to share my vast knowledge of knowledge with you. but if i shared my knowledge of knowledge with you, you would not be having a first hand experience. now, to receive a second-hand knowledge of knowledge would be next to useless. its unwise to try to gain wisdom through the knowledge of others. because when it comes to knowledge i know all there is to know. i know all there is to know. i know.
That poem left me felling like I was about to enter the twilight zone! <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/06CsMTRZ6uI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425">"><object height="355" width="425"> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/06CsMTRZ6uI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></object>
The ironic thing (or is it ironic, or just unconventional?) is that knowledge tends to exemplify the natural concept of infinity which pervades and "fills" all things. Think about it, how many points fill a square? Infinite. Still not enough, so we know that infinity in and of itself is inadequate to perfectly capture the essence and all aspects of what it attempts to describe. Likewise, how much knowledge does it take to equal infinite wisdom? Understanding the subtlety of wisdom will take you much farther than addition of knowledge? Get my gist? Infinity really represents the one whole, but made up of a "summation" of infinitessimaly small parts. These parts, when approximated to be equal, may be "counted". So, you're counting separate but approximately equal parts of this one whole. Now, how could you ever approximate how many of these equivalent parts (metaphysically representing "empty space") are needed to equal that sum total of the infinitely huge one whole? You see, addition is inadequate for what it conceptually represents on a fundamentally transcendental level. Thus, infinity must transcend even mathematics. The true (ideal, by which all conceptualized versions are derived) Infinity is that which describes (in and of itself) infinitely more information than it will ever be possible to comprehend fully. Thus, infinite complexity is needed to describe Infinity. Oh the irony. Well, that was my philosophy for the night...