On 6/16/03 1:42 PM, "Erik Moeller" erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
Cunc-
In other words, it's not curiosity, its knowledge generation.
What is knowledge? Hobbes does not refer to written knowledge specifically. I'm sure you will find plenty of people (including myself) who would argue for quite a bit of "knowledge generation" in the animal kingdom.
This discussions leads us nowhere, though -- I'm not trying to make a substantial point regarding whether Hobbes is right or wrong, I'm trying to show that people may disagree with what he had to say, and that it is therefore POV.
Ack! That POV acronym is so wretched. I understand what you're trying to do, but misrepresenting what Hobbes said is not the right way to go about it. That's all I was saying.
I had written a more useful response which I accidentally deleted, about how a more useful discussion of the logo question would not center on aesthetics, but on what message we want the logo to portray--e.g., the current one says "Wikipedia is serious, dense, textual, highminded, comprehensive, global, and perhaps arrogant, dull, confusing, and Anglocentric."
The flower one says "Wikipedia is fun and involves life/growth/the sun". So it's unsurprising it looks like a logo for a biotech/agritech corporation or organization, like Monsanto or the EU Eco-label.