Abstract

This article is about knowledge and argument. The purpose is to dramatize certain questions of knowledge: how and why does the better knowledge not become the better argument; what are the voices access ible to the claiming of new knowledge; what are the limits and destinies of contemporary expertise? The article is also an experiment in aca demic and intellectual forms, an experiment which corresponds to the central inquiry: how should knowledge speak now? There are three parts. The first part tells a story about enlightenment and persuasion. The second part is a dialogue between two voices which speak for the argumentative ethos of knowledge - Newtonian is a voice of the centre, and Paracelsan speaks from and for the margins. The third part is a dia logue between Critic and Speculator, a dialogue about the fate of know ledge in postmodernity. Throughout, the text includes a range of quotations, synchronized with its arguments. The continuous source of excerpts is the BSE news, which is taken to represent aspects of know ledge in our time. There is a strong association made between questions of contemporary knowledge and ecological crisis. Major reference points include: Beck; Baudrillard; Blanchot; Jabes