“[T]here is on the other hand this idea that we can only accurately say that objects are inaccessible when we try to access them from a single disciplinary perspective. Methodologically it is a generalizing operation across disciplines; a kind of epistemic perspectivalism which takes modelization as its principle – and maybe this is something to discuss but especially when we are leveling an argument against contemporary art as a totalizing structure of ‘generic indeterminacy’ isomorphic with the machinations of neo-liberalism, attempting to provide alternate models and methodologies requires procedures which are themselves generalizing at the conceptual level. So in a sense there are competing positions of ‘the generic’. The advocation for conceptual resources via pragmatics, logic, and the sciences winds up as one dependent on the highest forms of abstraction. Or at least one requiring a revision of our understanding of abstraction…”
–Keith Tilford, from his response.
Art has not adequately investigated [knowledge] as it has been entrapped in this other project of showing where knowledge fails over and over again, rather than dealing with the much more interesting problem of why knowledge is capable of succeeding sometimes.
–Joshua Johnson, from the Q&A