So I come back to the initially mentioned moment of sheer supremacy of fantasie over the fine mechanics and any kind of reason. And this is the defining thought of this text for Mathieu Turken: only phantasie allows competence to be- come sovereign knowledge.

In the gospel of John it is described very graphically how one can derive even from nothing a claim for power. This is what it says: He saw and believed. It is the moment when one comes to Christ's grave and Christ has gone. So blessed are those who do not see but believe, he seems to be seeing something: no-thing.  But he is the first who sees this nothing hence is a real eye witness hence to be treated with all dignity and respect as other inventors, too.

(As well when steering this vehicle the seeing of nothing is a repetitive conditiion. Very generell, as from the steering chair one can not get for oneself an overview and because one goes constantly too close to the wall with the camera.)

To see nothing or to not understand, or to see and under- stand, both belongs embedded in a theatrical whole. In one of the examples it is a mightly stone arrangement on the coast - Stonehenge, in the other case a strong rock grave in the Near East. As well one can look at the building of the employment deparment or any parking house building. Or one can look at Mathieu Turken's model.

Human logical programs are still impressable by demonstra- tions of psychological power in a reliable and unchanged way - this possibly is an atavism from times when with every shadow casted one had to get out of harm's way.

Mathieu Turken calls himself a technicial sociologist. History of technics is history of mind, in Asia saws work on draw, in Europe on push, what this means for the user one may picture for oneself, shortly said it is very European to push something through whilst it is very Asian to pull something through.