When I was a little girl, our daughter called black light to the dark. It seemed that he understood darkness not as a lack of light, but as another kind of light. Scientists have long demonstrated that what we can see is related to the interactions between matter, light and our eyes. But in her daughter's little life experience, the idea of incllarity didn't yet exist.

Years later, I met Von Goethe's color theory. Goeth said that the understanding of nature had to come from experience, because our senses in our bodies have been developed for it. He said that in order to understand nature, instead of shredding it into pieces, we had to make an observation of nature in its entirety. But throughout human history, small observations and data collection from samples have been key. Also create controlled environments to reproduce events under certain conditions and develop knowledge with changes. That's how the huge amount of technology we have today is born.

We are introducing the same idea in our daily lives: we are creating sports environments in the digital arena, monthly control environments, selection environments for the best couple… They seem to be designed with the same logic. Because do we think that the data we collect in those controlled environments is going to be a new knowledge for human development? Goethe's way of thinking, though, lately, I can't get out of my head, and I think all of these environments lead in themselves a dynamic of not listening in some way to our body. As mediators of perception.

I don't know if we've ever had a well-developed ability to listen to our body, but all of these means of perception can be an obstacle to this task, unless anyone who uses them has previously had a margin to develop that ability to listen to their own body, unless their body has had an experience of astonishment with nature.