Automatic update, changed:

pages/las.missing.md

@@ -37,4 +37,22 @@ at things (“oeuvres”), but would propose models. Politics would no
 longer fight for the realizations of values, but would elaborate manipula-
 ble hierarchies of models of behavior. All this would mean, in short, that
 a new sense of reality
->> line and surface
+>> line and surface
+
+----
+>Imaginal thought was a translation of
+fact into image, and conceptual thought was a translation of image into
+concept. (First there was the stone, then the image of the stone, then the
+explanation of that image.) In the future, the situation may become thus:
+Imaginal thought will be a translation from concept into image, and con-
+ceptual thought a translation from image to concept. In such a feedback
+situation, an adequate model can finally be elaborated. **First there will be
+an image of something, then there will be an explanation of that image,
+and then there will be an image of that explanation. This will result in a
+model of something (this something having been, originally, a concept).
+And this model may fit a stone (or some other fact, or nothing).** Thus a
+fact, or the absence of a fact, will have been disclosed. There would once
+more exist a criterion of distinction between fact and fiction (fit and
+unfit models), and a sense of reality would have been recovered.
+What has just been said is not an epistemological or ontological
+>>las