The scientific idea is that knowledge is validated by prediction and control, from which it follows that the subject of such knowledge is the human knower in general, or what you might call the context of prediction. In many ways this is a distillation of the mode in which your mind habitually operates, in the sense that it is the process of probing at matters because you have an interest in them, in which the sense of that phrase as 'have a investment and purpose in the outcome' predominates. The same double meaning inheres in the verb 'to speculate' on or about something. Have you ever inquired into yourself without a more or less overt intention to make things better? Can you? Is it possible? The extent of your openness is the breadth you can give to the possible meanings of better. You know what your best sense of better is, and it is the one you dignify as the most detached, most objective, most indifferent to outcome. This simply means that your goal, whether realistic or quite imaginary, is to identify as consciousness in general, as the abstract context of knowing. Acting thus is perhaps a way of sublating desire, of pushing interest so far that it is reconstituted beyond any particular interests. This might be a life's work, exploration is always worthwhile, it needs no external justification, but it seems to leave the figure of knowing itself unquestioned. This has something to do with focus, with the way a focused image passes through a vertex or pinhole. If there is a real disinterestedness it is not like this, it is not at the limit of interestedness, does not cure the pinhole of its embodied vices. It can't be reached by any path, but you can't shakes off the conviction that it is here, everywhere, hidden in plain sight.