(After reading excerpts from) Grammar of Creation, by G. Steiner.

A very important lesson: love is memory and memory is love.
Memory precedes creative thinking in higher level structures. It is like object oriented thinking, where memory are the objects.

Now I think, why can't I remember physics trivia as easy as other fields of personal study? Believing in the association of love and memory, I start to think the reasons why I don't love physics anymore. I find that the institutional mediation between physics and myself, derived from studying it as a bachelor, may have a great deal of implication. So I make myself conscious of the value of ideas in relation to its functional contexts. I start to explore my personal relation with ideas. I found that I love ideas which reveals, although unconsciously, to myself as a escape from material reality. I find Love as Art in the sense of Oscar Wilde; the beauty of "useless" objects. Even my attraction to a sense of knowledge as technology is portrayed as an idealization. When an idea becomes a commodity, I no longer feel attracted to it. In a way, academicism is the institutionalization of ideas and therefore an industry of commodities. I guess that poses a contradictory relation between myself and academy. I feel pushed to control my production means in order to take care of my old loves; to recover my love for physics. The problem is that I want to love too many ideas, which in this order of thinking, relegates my production means to low thinking jobs, which as we all know, happen to be either be rich and live of the rent or getting a low prestige, low income job. I don't know if I have the courage or the money to pursue this strategy.
Perhaps "knowing by heart" is knowing by function and is the specific continuities of our functions which determine the continuity of our knowledge. Well, this is no more than the utilitarian vision of the relation between knowledge and production. Is curious, I've just explained my idealism as an utilitarian result. Marx had already explained "idealism" in those terms, thou he never explained "his idealism". I have no problem to give an utilitarian reason for my idealism; as I just explained, to me utilitarian reasoning is just another idealism. I guess the last way of thinking may be another formulation of the duality condition of the being regarding idealism and utilitarianism: there are "those" who "think" that utilitarianism is just another idealism and there are those who "act" as if idealism would be just another way of utilitarianism.