In doctoral or academic study, we’re supposed to fill the gaps in knowledge and use gap-spotting to warrant the research.
Is that a Platonic model of knowledge? Knowledge exists in some perfect form; it’s just a question of filling in the gaps.
Michelangelo used a platonic model for his sculptural process. He said he was liberating his forms which he thought trapped in the blocks of marble, chipping away, and bringing forth the form unencumbered. (I know his sculptures changed to much rougher forms at the end of his career, but suspend your disbelief.)
Then comes artist Jeef Koons with his blue spheres sculptures. With this work, Koons comments on Michelangelo. Rodin, and the history of seeking the perfect form in the legacy of Greek and Roman art and knowledge too. Koons places a startling blue sphere, in which the viewer is reflected back, which imbalances the statue and suggests there is no perfect knowledge whose gaps need to filled in. Knowledge exists in a commentary about other conceptions of knowledge and in our reflection on it. Knowledge will never be perfect no matter how many gaps are filled. That is what Koons blue sphere sculptures say to me. What do you think? Should academics add in a metaphorical blue sphere?