Iconocartography as a Method of Responsible Objectivity

​

The method of iconocartography is not based solely on modern disciplines such as epistemology or hermeneutics. Rather, it draws on much older philosophical principles already present in the works of Confucius, Plato and Aristotle. What unites these thinkers is the conviction that truth is not merely the result of technical procedures, but requires an ethical attitude: a commitment to accuracy, self-correction and the acknowledgement of one’s own errors.

Confucius articulates this principle with particular clarity. For him, moral and epistemic integrity begins with fidelity to truth and the ability to recognise one’s own mistakes. An error, according to Confucius, does not primarily consist in imprecise work itself, but in the deliberate refusal to see one’s mistakes or in the attempt to conceal them. Truth, therefore, is not a static possession but a process—one that can only succeed if the individual is willing to acknowledge their own limitations. This attitude forms the ethical core of any method that aims at objectivity.

Iconocartography builds precisely on this foundation. It does not present itself as an infallible system, but as a methodological approach that structurally incorporates openness to revision. Objectivity is not understood here as absolute neutrality, but as a controlled and reflective approximation to what presents itself—through transparent criteria, conscious perspectives and a consistent willingness to correct errors. In this sense, iconocartography is deeply Confucian: it recognises that methodological precision without ethical integrity remains empty.

A related idea can be found in Plato’s philosophy. For Plato, knowledge is a movement from appearance to being, from mere opinion to justified insight. This movement is only possible if one is willing to question familiar images and dismantle false representations. Iconocartography adopts this critical impulse by refusing to take images, symbols and visual representations as truths in themselves. Instead, they are systematically examined, contextualised and, where necessary, deconstructed. Objectivity emerges here from distance to one’s own perspective.

Aristotle adds a further dimension through his emphasis on methodological adequacy. Knowledge requires clear concepts, careful distinctions and methods that are appropriate to their objects. Iconocartography follows this Aristotelian principle by avoiding universal explanatory schemes and instead adapting its analytical procedures to the specific nature of the iconographic material under consideration. Objectivity, in this sense, means doing justice to the object rather than forcing it into a preconceived framework.

Taken together, these perspectives form a method that understands objectivity not as rigid certainty, but as a responsible process. Iconocartography is objective insofar as it makes its own presuppositions visible, exposes its errors and subjects itself to continual critical review. It is iconoclastic not in the sense of destroying images for their own sake, but in the sense of critical clarification: images should be allowed to reveal what they actually contain, rather than what we prematurely project onto them.

Thus, iconocartography stands within a long philosophical tradition that does not confuse truth with infallibility. As in Confucius, everything begins with the willingness to recognise one’s own errors. Only where mistakes are not concealed but accepted as part of the process of knowledge can a method emerge that genuinely fulfils the claim to the greatest possible objectivity.