We are observing ourselves being observed by the painter, and made visible to his eyes by the same light that… — Michel Foucault

Absurdity destroys the and of the enumeration by making impossible the in where the things enumerated would be divided up.

Between the fine point of the brush and the steely gaze, the scene is about to yield up its volume.

In France at least, the history of science and thought gives pride of place sciences, sciences of the necessary, all close to philosophy: one can observe in their history the almost uninterrupted emergence of truth and pure reason. The other disciplines, however - those, for example, that concern living beings, languages, or economic facts - are considered too tinged with empirical thought, too exposed to the vagaries of chance or imagery to age old traditions and external events, for it to be supposed that their history could be anything other irregular. At most, they are expected to provide evidence of a state of mind, an intellectual fashion, a mixture of archaism and bold conjecture, of intuition and blindness. But what if empirical knowledge, at a given time and in a given culture, did possess a well defined regularity.