One of the questions that I’ve always wanted to delve into is the relationship between the aesthetic presentation and truth value of a message.

It may be as simple of a question as “does the truth have a visual style?”

But if so, what is that style? Does it change with the times?

Does truth, then, change with the times?

Then it is not truth.

My mind is intrigued by this question.

Maybe it’s an important question to ask, maybe it’s not.

Maybe by forcing myself to think it through I’ll discover more important things about visual communication or the structure of arguments.

I honestly don’t know.

Sometimes I try to classify visual elements into “binary coins,” to create a scale by which you could sort something visually or conceptually.

• tidy/untidy
• shallow/deep
• copy/original
• pretty/ugly

We often trust beautiful people, but the same people can be puppets for other people’s words and agendas.

Many people believe that “cleanliness is next to godliness,” yet the world can be a very complex and untidy place. God made pine trees that shed their pollen and coat everything with a thin coating of yellow. Is that tidy?

Must beauty come at the expense of depth?

Are there requisite visual elements to truth? Or is it all just visual/intellectual posturing?

(“I’m too good to pay attention to how I look.”)

I’ve long been curious about this.

So it’s time to explore deeper, to ask questions and push for answers.

Slowly, but surely, I want to pull at this “problem.”