**DigiTale: Cogito ergo sum**

Marjan Colletti (2003).

*‘Cogito, ergo sum’*[I think therefore I am]. Descartes’s dictum argues presence as a result of thinking, of consciousness, which cannot be doubted. If it is true and indubitable that he exists, we may assume that his consciousness of being immediately affects location. I think, therefore I am: somewhere! In other words, it implicates space. His consciousness is the proof of his existence, and his existence is the proof of space. His dictum may be consequently completed in the following way:

*‘Cogito, ergo sum’, ergo (spatium) est*; I think, therefore I am, therefore it (space) is.

Therefore consciousness is the trigger of space.

*Cogito, ergo spatium*, one may be allowed to say: I think, therefore space is. And as a result of logic, space is present, true and indubitable. If space is because I am because I think, there must be on the one hand an innate presence of space in everyone of us, independently of the shape of our thoughts, experiences or knowledge, which to Descartes are untrustworthy. Hence, can it be argued that ‘calculating’ interfaces possess an internal space? If we envision space as space in intrafaces, it would merely be described as alien and other: virtual.

*Sed ubi es?*[But where are you?]

*‘Ibi!’*[Here! His answer is obviously completely speculative yet possible.] ‘Here’ is a precise location. Now, according to the physical law of buoyancy, every volume immersed in a fluid – or liquid virtuality, as in Marcos Novak – displaces the equivalent amount of volume. Thus, Descartes, after having produced space through thinking, now claims his own space within that space because of his presence:

*Cogito, (ergo sum) ergo spatium_n*. I think, (therefore I am) therefore spacen (to the power of n). As a result, space which claims space within space displaces space fluidly and smoothly and independently of its shape. As a matter of fact, then, the presence of contemplated virtual space creates nomadic, displaced smooth space, which will be explicated later. This secondarily created n-metaspace can be conceived as a product of interfaces.

*‘- #*~ -’*[Noise] Unde is? [Where are you going?]

*‘Alibi!’*[Somewhere else!] Descartes has moved from ‘here’ to elsewhere, revealing his nomadic presence within virtuality. His movement creates buoyant forces within space. As a result, the presence and the definition of virtual, smooth spaces as described by Deleuze and Guattari imply a priori spatial changes inflected by forces and formulating parameters:

*(Cogito, ergo sum ergo) spatiumn cogitat spatium_n+*: (I think, therefore I am therefore) space_n thinks space_n+. Consequently, virtual space is a product related to virtual interfaces. Indeed, parametric design proliferates on virtual forces and software-based scripted influences producing virtual spatial assemblages. If consciousness is space and deletes and produces space at the same time, the range of spaces and their presence rises to a post-Euclidean n-dimensionality, in which the Cartesian x, y, z point coordinates system seems not adequate – compared to NURBS UV values and splinear geometries – to describe the geometry of intrafaces. This seems to be the general attitude towards virtual design: surfaces generated by scripted forces and parameters inherent to computer software. It follows that digitality is neither matter of, in or to interfaces, but intrinsic substance by intrafacial space.