4 ms·
> but that's mostly meaningless and these works hold virtually no cultural value compared to works we can actually read and engage with. You've basically defin
by admax88q 8y ago
> but that's mostly meaningless and these works hold virtually no cultural value compared to works we can actually read and engage with.
You've basically defined away the problem. If its lost then we can't read and engage with it and therefore has no cultural value.
I mean sure, things we don't have by definition can't contribute to culture today. But that is a useless tautology when talking about lost works.
- chc 8y agoI think you've misinterpreted their point. They were pointing out that whether or not we know the thing existed doesn't change the fact that we don't have it, and it's the fact that we don't have it that prevents it from contributing to culture today.
- drb91 8y agoMy point is that it’s the existing that contributes to culture, not knowledge that something once existed.