Ah,
he said, wisely, or seeming so;
the hawk, he hath indeed an eightfold greater
visual acuity than thine but thee, when seeing,
truly see.The hawk sees the rodent twitch and can
anticipate his future, sure enough;
as instant meal, perchance, may be,
or toy to train young mind to preyingBut thou, behold the marvel of thine sight:
In seeing, see ye the past, the present, aye,
and many possible futures in a single glance;
and, it’s quite possible, in a single object!The hawk sees much further than you
… in space …
But ye than he in time!
Questions for a-pondering:
Is there some †ineffable insight† ‡in the above‡?
Is it even right?
† Is there such a thing as “ineffable insight”?
‡ does the fact that one can talk around a thing and perchance convey a bit of it, despite difficulty, make the ineffable… well, totally, effable? Is there a hard boundary between talking around a thing and talking about a thing? Or is that more by way of a spectrum…? Is effability binary, digital, quantum? Or is it, like so much else, grayscale? Or complex-coloured by the argument to represent a tensor field?