Isabelle has a list (get it) of things we discussed around the sugar. What is significant between things does not equal what is significant to or for us. Carl has a good outline of an ontograph as a list of relations between things. John Michael had cold feet, now they’re warmer, and he likes learning that we understand things from our point of view rather than its (though we don’t really know what that might be like yet). I like Paris’s point that rather than think about things from what they do for me but what they do for themselves. Thinking about what that actually means, and its implications, is probably harder and more significant than we realise. Ali realises that thinking about anything in itself rather than from a human point of view changes what a thing is. Isabelle likes her ontograph to be spatially suggestive, nice. Michaela mixes the world, her world, and class, this is good, for surely everything is (in reality) neatly tangled up.