![\"\"](\"http:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/duck_rabbit.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
“I contemplate a face, and then suddenly notice its likeness to another. I see that it has not changed; and yet I see it differently. I call this experience \u201cnoticing an aspect…\u201d And I must distinguish between the \u2018continuous seeing\u2019 of an aspect and the \u2018dawning\u2019 of an aspect<\/strong>… I see two pictures, with the duck-rabbit surrounded by rabbits in one, by ducks in the other. I do not notice that they are the same. Does it follow from this that I see something different in the two cases? It gives us a reason for using this expression here. \u201c I saw it quite differently, I should never have recognized it!\u201d Now, that is an exclamation. And there is also a justification for it. I should never have thought of superimposing the heads like that, of making this comparison between them…. I describe the alteration (change of aspect) like a perception; quite as if the object had altered before my eyes…. The expression of a change of aspect is the expression of a new perception and at the same time of the perception\u2019s being unchanged. I suddenly see the solution of a puzzle-picture.”<\/p>\n Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The picture Wittgenstein alludes to is not the one above but this one: “I contemplate a face, and then suddenly notice its likeness to another. I see that it has not changed; and yet I see it differently. I call this experience \u201cnoticing an aspect…\u201d And I must distinguish between the \u2018continuous seeing\u2019 of an aspect and the \u2018dawning\u2019 of an aspect… I see two pictures, with the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[93],"tags":[77,41,72,51,9,82,135,65],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=779"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":785,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779\/revisions\/785"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=779"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=779"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=779"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/sicv.activearchives.org\/logbook\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/JastrowWittgenstein_Duck.jpg\")
\nThe philosopher redrew the image, eliminating the textures and shades. The illusion had to be “calligraphic”, reduced to the minimal expression of a contour. To move from an organic morphing animal to a crystalline puzzle-picture, the philosopher does not use only words, he also engages with hand and ink.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"