1
When Light Crosses One’s Mind: An Entwined Genealogy
(More Light by Friedrich Woldemar—an image of Goethe on his deathbed, titled after his
famous last words)
Travis DiRuzza December 2015
Science, Ecology and Contested Knowledge(s) with Elizabeth Allison
2
Prelude:ParticipationandtheEntwinedstateofSeerandSeen
Holdtheillustrationaboveateye-levelandarm’slengthfromyourface.
Closeyourlefteyeandfixyourrighteyeonthedotatthecenterofthegrid.Slowly
movethepagetowardyourfacealongyourlineofvisionuntilthestardisappears.
Thestarvanishesbecauseitisfallingonyoureye’sblindspot,asmallarealacking
photoreceptorswhereyouropticnerveconnectstoyourretina.Andyetwhenyou
takealookaround,youseenoholesinyourvisualfield.Whyisthis?
Nowcloseyourrighteyeandwithyourleft,stareatthestar.Repeatthe
sameprocessuntilthecircleinthegriddisappears.However,takenotethatthough
thecirclevanishes,thegridlinesremainintact.Yourmindisfillinginthespace,
effectivelycausingtheblindspottovanish,thuscreatinganunbrokenvisualfield.
Vision,itturnsout,isparticipatory.Toagreaterdegreethanoneusuallyrealizes,
theseerandtheseenareboundupwithoneanother.1
1ThisimageandexerciseistakenfromMichaelTalbot,TheHolographicUniverse,164.
3
Thesameistrueofthefamousduck/rabbitorold-woman/young-woman
gestaltdrawings.Thereissomethingthattheviewercontributes,causingtheimage
toappearasnowone,nowastheotherfigure.Amorerecent,andperhapsmore
disturbingexample,is“thedress,”apicturethatwentviralontheInternetasfriends
askedeachotherindisbeliefhowtheycould
possiblyseewhiteandgoldwhenthedress
wasclearlyblueandblack—orviceversa.In
contrasttothegestalt-switchimages,whatis
sojarringaboutthedressisthat(atfirstat
least)peoplecannotseemtoflipthewaythey
seeit.Duetothephoto’slackofenvironmental
cuesindicatinglightlevels,themind’seyecan
interpretthecolorsasblueandblackwitha
glareuponthedress,orwhiteandgoldin
shadow.
4
Thislight-shiftedtripleimageofthedresshelpstoillustratethetwodifferent
colorpossibilities:blueandblackappearsmoreclearlyontheleft,whilewhiteand
goldisemphasizedontheright.Asanadditionalexercise,stareatthedressonthe
rightandtrytotuneintoitswhiteandgold;thenquicklyshiftbacktothemiddle
dressandseeitinthesamecolors.Nextdothesamewiththedressontheleft,
tryingtoseethemiddledressasblueandblack.Withsomepracticeyoushouldbe
abletocolor-flipthedressinthemiddleinawaysimilartothegestalt-switch
drawings.Ifyousitwithitlongenoughyoumayevenbegintoseeablueandgold
orblackandwhitedress.2
Thesalientfeatureofthedressimageisthemind’sabilitytointerpretits
lightinanambiguousfashion.Ifcolorsweresimplyobjectivewavelength
frequenciesoflight,suchvisualdiscrepanciesshouldbeimpossible—especiallyfor
2N.B.Theactualdressisblueandblack.
5
asinglepersonviewingthesameimage!Itappearsthatourperceptionofcolor
dependsnotjustonwavelengthoflight,butonhowthemindparticipatesby
interpretingthatlight—readingenvironmentalcues,bringingpasthabitstobear,
andlikelycarryinginnatetendencies.Whatappearsisnotseenin-itself,but
mediatedbythelightofdayandthelightofthemind.Theseerandtheseenare
boundupwithoneanother,andlightactsasanintermediary.
TheGreatDivisionbetweenSeerandSeen
Thoughitwasnotalwaysso,theideathatseerandseenareboundupwith
oneanothermaysoundstrangetomodernears.Itcertainlyrunscontrarytowhat
BrunoLatourdiagnosesas“modern”inhisbook,WeHaveNeverBeenModern.
Modernssupposedlydifferentiateabsolutelybetweensocietyandnature,the
humanandthenonhuman,andtheseerandtheseen.3Hecallsthisdifferentiation
theInternalGreatDivide,anditgivesrisetotheExternalGreatDivide:the
perceivedstarkdifferencebetweentheWestandtherest,thelatterwhointheir
premodernstatedonotyetadequatelydistinguishbetweennatureandsociety,or
theseerandtheseen.LatoursuggeststhatbothDividesareinfactillusions:
thetwoGreatDividesdonotdescribereality—ourownaswellasthatofothers—butdefinetheparticularwayWesternershadofestablishingtheirrelationswithothersaslongastheyfeltmodern.‘We’,however,donotdistinguishbetweenNatureandSocietymorethan‘They’makethemoverlap.Ifwetakeintoaccountthenetworksthatweallowtoproliferatebeneath...theylookalotlikethenetworksinwhich‘They’saytheylive.4
3WeHaveNeverBeenModern,99.4WeHaveNeverBeenModern,103.
6
Latourclaimsthatnetworksofwhathecalls“quasi-objects”or“natures-cultures”
areprimarybutthenbecomeseparatedtogivetheappearanceofacleardivide
betweennatureandculture.Sowhathashappenedtousandhowdidweeverthink
wehadbecomemodern?
WeWesternerscannotbeonecultureamongothers,sincewealsomobilizeNature.WedonotmobilizeanimageorasymbolicrepresentationofNature,thewayothersocietiesdo,butNatureasitis,oratleastasitisknowntothesciences—whichremaininthebackground,unstudied,unstudiable,miraculouslyconflatedwithNatureitself.5
ItisthisconflationofscienceandnaturethatcreatesbothDivides;thisconflation
leadsusmodernstoforgetthatscience—intheformof“biology,electronic
microscopes,andtelecommunicationsnetworks,”6forexample—constructsthe
“images”and“symbolicrepresentations”thatmobilizenaturethroughaseriesof
networks,justasotherculturesdo.Weare,infact,noexception.Itisthedenialof
theconstructiveroleplayedbysciencethatcreatestheillusionofacleansubject-
objectdivideforthemodernscientificobserver,afigurethatDonnaHarawaycalls
“themodestwitness.”Incontrasttothepremodernoverlapbetweencultureand
nature,andbetweenseerandseen,suchamodern,modest“man”perfectlymirrors
realitybywhollyeffacinghimselfandhisparticipationthroughthemagicofscience:
Thisself-invisibilityisthespecificallymodern,European,masculine,scientificformofthevirtueofmodesty....Thisisthevirtuethatguaranteesthatthemodestwitnessisthelegitimateandauthorizedventriloquistfortheobjectworld,addingnothingfromhismereopinions,fromhisbiasingembodiment….Hisnarrativeshaveamagicalpower—theylosealltraceoftheirhistoryasstories,asproductsofpartisanprojects,ascontestable
5WeHaveNeverBeenModern,97.6WeHaveNeverBeenModern,98.
7
representations,orasconstructeddocumentsintheirpotentcapacitytodefinefacts.Thenarrativesbecomeclearmirrors.7
Bydenyinganybiasofsubjectivity,thescientificobserverpositsacleandivide
betweensocietyandnature.Sciencefacilitatesthisdivision,claimingtospeakfor
natureandfailingtoacknowledgeitsownconstructedstatus—astatuswhich
ultimatelyunderminesitsclaimstoobjectivityandtotheexclusionofsocialfactors.
Interestingherearethevisualmetaphorsatplayinthequoteaboveandalready
presentinthese17thcenturymen’swritings.Indeedtheconnectionbetweenvision
andknowledgestretchesfarbackintothe“entwinedhistoryoflightandmind.”8
InthisessayIexaminetheprogressiveconstructionofthemodernscientific
subject,thismodestwitness,byofferingagenealogyofthediverseoffspringoflight
andmindthroughtheages.Beginninginantiquity,weseeageneraltrajectoryfrom
amorecompact,networkedandparticipatorynotionofself,worldandlight,toward
amoredistinct,dividedandobjectiveview.Withtheso-calledachievementofthe
modestwitness,theGreatDivides,andthewithdrawaloftheparticipationofthe
subject,light-as-objectcontinuedtoresistdescriptionaseitheraparticleorawave.
Inrecenttimes,whenlightisconsideredbothaparticleandawave,advancesina
numberoffieldshaveforcedustoreconsidernetworksandtheparticipatoryview
abandonedbythemodestwitness.Byopeningtheblackboxthatthe17thcentury
closedaroundlight,Iwillattempttocontributetothisprojectofluminous
participation.
7ModestWitness,23-24.Harawaytakestheterm“modestwitness”fromStevenShapinandSimonSchaffer’sLeviathanandtheAir-Pump:Hobbes,BoyleandtheExperimentalLife.8ThisisthesubtitleofArthurZajonc’sbook,CatchingtheLight.
8
Thisisimportantbecausethewayweconceiveoflight,andbyextension
vision,actuallychangeswhatweareabletoseeintheworld—bothliterallyand
figuratively.Theage-oldconnectionbetweenlightandknowledgesuggeststhatour
conceptionsoflightevenshapewhatweareabletoknow.Toconsiderlightandthe
objectsofsightasthings-out-therecapableofdescriptionthroughpurely
mechanisticmodels,asdidthescientistsofthe17thand18thcentury,runsintowhat
WhiteheadcallstheFallacyofMisplacedConcreteness.Hedefinesitas“the
accidentalerrorofmistakingtheabstractfortheconcrete.”9Thisispreciselywhat
themodernshavedoneinconflatingthemodelsofsciencewithnatureitself.While
itseemsperfectlyvalidforeacheratochangeandimproveupontheirpredecessors’
ideasandabstractionsaboutlight,vision,self,andworld,forgettingthatthe
abstractionsareabstractionsisamistake.Whiteheadadvises:“Youcannotthink
withoutabstractions;accordingly,itisoftheutmostimportancetobevigilantin
criticallyrevisingyourmodesofabstraction.”10Thisessayexploreshowsomeof
theabstractionsrelatinglight,mindandvisionhavebeenrevisedthroughtimein
theWest,andhowthatprocessmaycontinueconstructively.Whilemystoryis
certainlyonlyoneofmanythatcouldbetold,itisonewayofansweringthe
questionaskedbyIsabelleStengersinherbookThinkingwithWhitehead:“Whathas
happenedtous?”Stengersexplains:
Thequestion‘whathashappenedtous?’isnotthesearchforanultimateexplanation,butaresourcefortellingourstoriesinanotherway,inawaythatsituatesusotherwise—notasdefinedbythepast,butasable,perhaps,toinheritfromitinanotherway.11
9ScienceandtheModernWorld,51.10ScienceandtheModernWorld,59.11ThinkingwithWhitehead,14.
9
Sucharevisioniststorytellingisanadventureratherthanaproof,anexplanation,or
aninquisition—andifitsucceedswillshedfreshlightonthenetworkshiddenby
theGreatDivides,openingnewavenuesofparticipationamongstlightandmind,
newwaysofseeingintheworld.
TheEyesofHorus
InEgypt,lightwasnotascientificobjectbutthelivedrealityofadivinesun
godthatnourishedearlyagriculturalsociety.Norcanonespeakblithelyofmind,
forasRobertBellahexplains,“inEgyptianheartmeansmorethanitdoesinEnglish:
itincludesmindandwillaswellasfeeling.”12Sowhenconsideringlightandmindin
Egypt,onemustrememberlight’sdivinityandmind’spartakinginsomethingcloser
tosoul.13Thoughitiscertainlynotthefirstnotionofadivinesun,oneofthemore
salientandwell-documentedcasesistheMiddleKingdomperiod(1975–1641BCE)
inEgypt.Thusourstoryoflightandmindbeginswiththerelationshipbetweenthe
sungodRe,theEgyptianpeople,andtheircosmology.InthissectionIdrawon
Bellah’sReligioninHumanEvolution.
Theearliesttribalreligionstendedtoconceiveofthecosmosassuffused
withspiritsandthusnottopositacelestialrealmorabeyond.Asthisphase
transitionedtowardtheoneinquestion,numinousenergywasincreasingly
investedinachief,whobegantomediatecertainritualrelationswiththespirit
powers.Oncethismediationbecameexclusive,afusionofdivineandhumaninthe
12ReligioninHumanEvolution,239.13IusesoulhereinanAristoteliansenseasthatwhichanimatesthebody,allowingitsself-propelledmotionaswellasmorerarefiedmotionsofwill,thoughtandfeeling.SeeDeAnima,155-162.
10
personofthekingaroseinarchaicreligions.TheMiddleKingdomperiodbeginsto
differentiatethisidentity,withthekingoftenbeingcalled“thesonofRe,”thoughhe
isstillconsidereddivine.14Thisseparationoftranscendentandimmanentwasa
gradualprocessthatreachedfulldifferentiationintheaxialperiodwiththeexalted
monotheismoftheJewsandtheGood-beyond-beingofPlato.15Thefullprojection
ofthedivineintotheheavensandoutofthis-worldsetthestageforthemodernself
to“nolongerhaveneedofthathypothesis,”toquotethelegendarywordsof
LaPlace.16ThegreatdividebetweenheavenandearthpresagestheGreatDivideof
modernity,butforthemoment,thedivineiscertainlystillneeded.
Egyptiansolarritualwasassociatedwithdeathandrebirthinasenseof
renewal,rejuvenationandfertility:
Unlessthesun,whichgrowsoldatdusk,descendsintotheutterdarknessoftheunderworld,itwillnotberebornatdawn;unlessthelandissubmergedbytheinundationoftheNile,itwillnotbearcrops;unlessallthings,includinghumans,die,lifewillnotcontinue.17
Thesunisnotasymbolofdeathandrebirthbutispartofanetworkedcosmosthat
exhibitstheseoscillationsatmultiplelevels.UsingLatour’sterminologywemight
saythatthesunisaquasi-objectwithconnectionstobothsidesofthemodernGreat
Dividebetweennatureandculture.Whilethemodernsubjectwouldseethe
astronomyofdayandnightaspurelynatural,andbeliefsabouttheafterlifeas
14ReligioninHumanEvolution,232.Asinthecaseofthemasculinemodestwitness,Iintentionallyusethepronoun“he”whenreferringtoapositionsuchaskingthatwascategoricallyreservedformen.15ForIsraelandGreece,seechapters6and7inReligioninHumanEvolution.TheaxialbreakthroughisalsoseenintheeastinConfucianChinaandBuddhistIndia;seechapters8and9.16ThestorygoesthatwhenLaPlacewaspresentinghismetaphysicalsystemoftheworldtoNapolean,thelatterasked,“ButwhereisGodinthissystemofyours.”LaPlacereplied:“Ihavenoneedofthathypothesis.”17ReligioninHumanEvolution,233.
11
purelycultural,theyareclearlyintertwinedhere,furtherparalleledbyanother
classichybridphenomena—agriculture—whichcombines“natural”growthwith
innovativehumanintervention.
Tofurtherhighlightitsstatusasaquasi-object,considerhowthisimmanent
sungodmovingthroughtheskyalsotakesonpersonifiedcharacteristicsand
appearstoexhibitaconcernforhumanwelfare:
Heshinesintheskyfortheirsake;Forthemhemadeplantsandcattle,Fowlandfishtofeedthem.Heslewhisfoes,reducedhischildren,Whentheythoughtofmakingrebellion.Hemakesdaylightfortheirsake.18
Whilethegodisstillidentifiedwiththesun,hetakesonmoreagencyanddevelops
amoreintimaterelationwithhispeople.Thisdifferentiationfromadeitythatis
purelyofthecosmos,toonewhostandsoutsideitinsomesense,becomes
increasinglypronouncedintheNewKingdom(1550–1070BCE):
Turnbacktous,OlordoftheplenitudeoftimeYouwereherewhennothinghadcomeintobeing,Andyouwillbeherewhen“they”areatanend.Youletmeseedarknessthatyougive—ShineformethatImightseeyou.19
Agodwhopre-andpost-dateshiscosmosclearlybeginstohavetranscendent
qualities,andeventotranscendtheothergodsofthepantheon—andyetstill
imagesoflightareusedtodescribehim.Thelightofanimmanentsungodwill
eventuallybefullytransportedoutofthecosmosasatranscendent“lightoftruth”
18“TheInstructionAddressedtoKingMerikare,”inLichtheim,OldandMiddleKingdoms,106,quotedinBellah,242.19Assman,TheSearchforGod,223,quotedinBellah,245.
12
(inPlatoforexample).Thisintertwiningofa“natural”andimmanentsungodwith
atranscendentandpersonifiedgodfurtherillustratesitsstatusasaquasi-object.
EvenatthislatephaseinEgypt,thetranscendingtendenciesofgodarenever
seentocontradicthisimmanence:
Yourtwoeyesarethesunandmoon,yourheadisthesky,yourfeetarethenetherworld…youaretheearth…youarethewater,youaretheairbetweenthem.20
Thissenseofgodasthecosmos,andespeciallyasthesun,permitsafeelingof
humanparticipationinthedivineasitshinesdown.Onehymntothesun
emphasizesthisthemeofparticipation:“Alleyesseethroughyou.Theycando
nothingwhenyourMajestygoesdown.”21Thisthemeofparticipationwithlightwill
concernusasweturntotheGreeks.Definitivetothismomentofreligious
evolutionisthecominglingoftranscendenceandimmanenceintheEgyptiansense
ofagodwhobothstandsonhighandisparticipatedin.Theundifferentiatedsense
ofagodwhobothisthecosmosandyetisbeyondthecosmoswillbecomefully
distinguishedinaxialGreece.Theveryquestionastowhetherthesunisdivineor
onlyasymbolofthedivine,aswellaswhetheritpartakesofthematerialrealmwill
becriticalinthisdifferentiation.Theaxialdivisionbetweentranscendenceand
immanenceseemstolaythegroundworkforadivisionbetweenreligionand
science,andthusultimatelythemoderndivisionbetweensocietyandnature.
20Assman,TheSearchforGod,235,quotedinBellah,245.21Assman,EgyptianSolarReligionintheNewKingdom,75,quotedinBellah245.
13
SeeingwiththeGreeks
InEgyptthereligionofsocietyandthefactsofnaturewerenotdistinguished
assuch,butratherwerenetworkedthroughquasi-objectslikethesun,which
partookofboth(natureandsocietybothbeingmodernabstractions).Furthermore,
thepeoplethemselveswerenetworkedwiththesungod,participatingwithlight
bothinactsofworshipandintheactofvision.Whiletherelationoflightandmind
hadadistinctlyreligioustoneinAncientEgypt,Greeceofferedusthefirstinklingsof
science,alongwithreligiousskepticism—therebycarryingforwardthe
differentiationsIamtracingbetweentranscendenceandimmanence,religionand
science,societyandnature,andseerandseen.
Xenophanes(570–475BCE)famouslycriticizedGreekanthropomorphism
sayingthatifhorsesandcattlecoulddraw,thentheirgodswouldbeequineand
bovine.22Weseeherethefirstinklingsofaseparationbetweensocietyandnature,
withXenophanesrecognizingthatanthropomorphicsocialformsarebeing
projectedontosomethingforeigntothem.Inthesamevein,hequestionedthe
divinenatureoftheSun,claimingthatitfallsintoaholeeachnightwithanentirely
newonerisingeachmorning.SuchathingcouldnotbeaGodbutmoreresembleda
terrestrialobject.Xenophanesisthefirsttobegintodifferentiatethereligiousand
scientificviewsofthesun,bringingthesunwithinthesphereoftheimmanent,
materialrealm.23Anaxagoras(510–428BCE)continuesthiswork,butendsup
exiledforteachingthatthesunisared-hotstoneandthatthemoonismadeof
22Notopoulos,168.23Notopoulos,168.
14
earth.Hehadseenameteoriteandthoughtitwasachipofthesun.Anaxagoras
wasalsothefirsttorealizethatmoonlightisreflectedsunlightandthatnightisthe
shadowcastbytheearthblockingthesun.NeitherXenophanesnorAnaxagoras
doubtedtheexistenceofsomesortofdivinity,butbothwereengagedin
differentiatinganunseen,transcendent,spiritualrealmfromtheirvisible,immanent
surroundings,whichwereamenabletoincreasinglyscientificdescription.24
Empedocles(495–435BCE),aself-proclaimeddivineshamanaswellas
proto-scientist,alsoreflectsthisduallegacy.25Hedevisedthefirsttheoryofvision,
proposingthataninnerfireintheeyeemitsitsownrayoflight.Visionisproduced
bythemutualcontactofthelightofthesunandlightoftheeye.Thistheoryrelies
onthemaximthat“likeperceiveslike”andthusvisionisaproductofthesympathy
betweenthefireoftheeyeandthefireofthesun.AswesawinEgypt,thereis
participationhere,anentwiningofseer,seen,andlight,butaddedarethe
beginningsofarational,scientificexplanation.Empedoclesdoesnotsimplyassert
thatoneparticipateswithlightintheactofvision,butoffersareasonforit:thereis
somethinginthesubjectthatcorrespondstotheobject.26SowhileEmpedocles
exemplifiesthebuddingdifferentiationbetweenscienceandreligion,healso
exhibitsthenetworkedparticipationbetweensubjectandobjectmoretypicalof
premodernsocieties.
Platotooholdsthesetendenciestowarddifferentiationandintegrationin
exquisitetension,offeringagrandsynthesisofEmpedocles’theoryofvision
24Notopoulos,171-2.25Notopoulos,171.26Notopoulos,171.
15
alongsidethereligiousandscientificconceptionsofthesun.Platocombinedboth
conceptionsinhisanalogyofthesun,usingthetwotoexplaintherelationofBeing
toBecoming,respectively.TheSunactsasakindofpivotbetweenthetranscendent
realmofeternalforms(Being)andthematerialrealmofgrowthanddecay
(Becoming).Platodoesnotseethesunasanendinitself,i.e.asanimmanentgod,
butasasymbolofahigherreality.Thisistheaxialmove,themakingtranscendent
ofdivinity,theprojectionofthegodsnotjustupintotheheavens,butevenbeyond
intoaninvisiblerealm.
Plato’sRepublicpresentsthefamousanalogyoftheSuninwhichSocrates
states:“themanybeautifulthingsandtherestarevisiblebutnotintelligible,while
theformsareintelligiblebutnotvisible.”27Theanalogyhingesuponthisdivision.
Sightmaybepresentintheeyes,andcolorsinthevisiblethings,butwithoutthe
presenceoflight,sightwillseenothingandthecolorswillremainunseen.28Andso
Socratespointsoutthatthesunisthe“causeandcontroller”oflight,thatwhich
allowsoursighttoseeandforvisiblethingstobeseen.29Lightandsightareakinto
thesun,butthesunissuperiortothese.Socratesstatestheanalogy:“whattheGood
itselfisintheintelligiblerealm,inrelationtounderstandingandintelligiblethings,
thesunisinthevisiblerealm,inrelationtosightandvisiblethings.”30Thuswhen
anobjectofknowledgeisilluminatedbythelightoftruth,whichshinesforthfrom
theGood,thesoulknowsthisobjectandpossessesunderstanding.Knowledgeand
27Ibid.,507b.28Ibid.,507d-e.29Ibid.,508a.30Ibid.,508b.
16
truthareliketheGood,buttheGoodissuperiortothese.Tosumup:justasthesun
provideslight,whichallowsvisibleobjectstobeseenandtheeyestosee,sodoes
theGoodillumineobjectsofknowledgewithtruthandallowtheknowertoknow.
WhatisinterestingisthatPlatousestheproto-scientificinsightsofthe
Presocraticstogroundbyanalogyhisideaoftranscendence.31It’sthescientific
pointofviewthatinfactallowsPlatotomakethetranscendentmove;onlyby
disenchantingthesuncanitbecomethesymbolofadivinerealmthatisunseen.
Forthis,PlatoowesadebttoXenophanes.Furthermore,inthescientificrelationof
sunandmoonproposedbyAnaxagoras(thatmoonlightisreflectedsunlight)is
containedthenotionoforiginalandcopy,whichmapsontoBeingandBecoming,the
PlatonicFormanditsmanyinstantiations.Empedocles’snotionof'likeperceives
like’suggeststhePlatonicideaoftheeyebeingsun-like.32Butthesunissuperiorto
lightandvision,justasthegoodissuperiortoknowledgeandtruth—andultimately
asBeingissuperiortoBecoming.Whilelightwasdivine,andvisionparticipatory,
fortheEgyptians,Platomorepreciselyidentifiedthemassun-like,thoughthesunis
nolongerdivine,butasymbolofthedivine.Visionwasstillparticipatory,butits
relationtolightandtheobjectsofsightbecameamodelforanoeticparticipation
withtranscendentFormsviathelightoftruth.
Dichotomiesthatwereonlylatentandasyetundifferentiatedforthe
EgyptiansbecameincreasinglyarticulatedwiththeGreeks,thoughnotyetreaching
thestarkCartesiandualismstowhichIwillturnnext.WhileforPlatoknowledge
31NotopoulosII,228.32NotopoulosII,230.Platocallstheeyesun-like(helioeidestaton)atRepublic,508b
17
andtruthwerestillboundupwithsomethingdivine,themodernmindwould
slowlydisengagesuchanotion.Indeedourword“theory”comesfromtheGreek
theorein(θεωρεῖν)whichmeans“tolookat,”fromtheoros(θεωρός),“spectator.”33
Thisusagetracesbacktotheoria(θεωρία),aculturalpracticeinwhichaspectator
“wassentasanofficialrepresentativeofhiscitytoviewareligiousfestivalin
anothercityandthenreturntogiveafullreporttohisfellowcitizens.”34Plato
transformsthisoriginalsenseoftheoriainwhichtheviewerseesembodiedritual
andsacredobjects,intoanoeticpracticeinwhichthephilosopherseeswiththe
mind’seyeinvisiblegodsandtranscendentforms.Theory,awordnowadays
associatedwithabstractionandseeminglydivorcedfromboththematerialworldof
hardfactandthereligiousworldofdivinetruth,originallyemergedoutofakindof
spiritualseeingthatheldtogethertherealmsofmatter,thinkingandthegods.Plato
hadnotyetforgottenthisconnection,modelingthehigherrealmsofsacredknowing
uponthevisibletrinityofseer,lightandseen.
BecomingModern
ThoughImustskipmuch,thenextepisodeinthisstorybringsustoRené
Descartes(1596–1650).35Theincreasinglyscientificattitudeinspiredbythe
33ReligioninHumanEvolution,577.34Ibid.BellahdrawshisanalysisfromAndreaNightingale’sSpectaclesofTruthinClassicalGreekPhilosophy:TheoriainItsCulturalContext.35AshiningmomentoftheMiddleAgesthatwouldreceiveattentioninaworkoflargerscopeisRobertGrosseteste’smagnumopusDeLuce(1225)inwhichtheauthorassertsthatlightwasthemediumchosenbyGodforcreation—thusproposingaunifiedphysicsandmetaphysics.Effectively,Plato’s“analogy”ofthesunisnolongerananalogybecauselightisactuallythefundamentalbuildingblockofthecosmosandthusthebasisofepistemology,ontologyandcosmogony.Grosstestewasoneofthelastrepresentativesofapointofviewthatheldintensionthereligiousandscientificconceptionsoflight.Henceforthlightwouldbeblackboxedasanobjectforthestudybythemodernscientificsubject.SeeMcEvoy,MetaphysicsofLightintheMiddleAges.
18
breakthroughsofCopernicus,TychoBrahe,Galileoandothersofthisrevolutionary
time,directedattentiontowardphenomenatheeyescouldseeandmeasure.
TheorieslikeEmpedocles’fellintodisreputeasmerespeculationbecausenorays
couldbedetectedemittingfromtheeyes.36Insteadtheraysoflightfromthesun
werethoughttobounceoffobjectsandbecastuponapassiveandreceptivesurface
withintheeye.Thecurvedsurfaceoftheeyewasunderstoodtobelikealensthat
refractedandfocusedtheraysupontheretina.However,
oneproblemremained:accordingtotheunderstandingof
lenses,suchanimagewouldbecastupsidedownupon
theinnereye,andyetweseetheworldright-sideup.
Descartes,inhisstudyofoptics,wrestledwiththe
problemoftheinvertedimage.37Inthespiritoftheage,
heperformedanexperiment,removinganox’seye,
scrapingofftheback,andpeeringthroughit.Theworld
hesawwasindeedupsidedown(asillustratedinthe
imagetotheleft,wherethetriangle,diamondandcirclereversepositionsafter
passingthroughtheeye).Descartesusedthisassupportfortheexistenceofa
soul—whichhecalledrescogitans,“thinkingstuff,”asopposedtothematerialworld
36AVeryBriefHistoryofLight,32.37AVeryBriefHistoryofLight,38-40.
19
of“extendedstuff,”resextensa.Thesoulwasnecessarytofliptheimageright-side
up,asillustratedintheimagetotheright:
Alltherewasinthecosmoswasthesetwothings,rescogitansandres
extensa,“thinkingstuff”and“extendedstuff,”soulandmatter,andwhichwould
eventuallybecomejustmindandmatter.Theseerandtheseen,aswellasthe
subjectandtheobject,werefullyarticulatedandstrictlydivided.38Extendedmatter
isimmanentwhilethemindistranscendentandwithoutdimensions.Theinnerfire
oftheeyebecameonesideofacompletelydualistworld.Themixedspeculationsof
theEgyptianswhichsawGodasnowimmanent,nowtranscendent,aswellasthe
realmsofBeingandBecominglinkedbythesolarmetaphorinPlato,becamehyper-
separatedinthemodernera.Theintelligiblefoundnoanalogyinthevisible.In
Latour’sterms,naturehadbeenobjectifiedononesideandsocietyontheother(the
latterwhichincludedboththemindinrelationtoGodandthemindinrelationto
nature).Becausenatureisconceivedasanobjectwithdefiniteandindependent
qualities,mindneedonlybecomelikeaclearmirrorinordertoperfectlyreflect
natureasitis.Theeyeaspassivesurfacewasretainedbuttheactiveroleofthe
mindwasdiscarded,
givingrisetothe
conflationofscience
38Indeed,oneofthemosttroublesomeaspectsofDescartes’systemwashowthetworealmsinteractedwithoneanotherwhentheyweresostarklydivided.
20
andnature,andtheillusionofthemodestwitnesswhocanreflectnaturelikea
“clearmirror.”39
Newtonwouldofferfueltothisfire.HisgreatsuccessinintegratingKepler’s
lawsofcelestialdynamicswithterrestrialmechanicsradicallysupportedthe
Copernicanheliocentrictheoryandstronglyvalidatedtheexplanatorypowerofthe
scientificmethod.ScientistslistenedcloselywhenNewton’scorpusculartheoryof
lightsuggestedthatlightwasabodythatobeyedthesamelawsofmotionasthe
planetsandasapplesfallingfromtrees.Terrestrialandcelestialdynamicswere
identicalandthecosmoswasunified.40Suchaunificationcarriedanuminous
charge,anelegantsimplicityandanempoweringofmodern“man.”WhileNewton
himselfwasstillinterestedinmattersreligiousandoccult,thelegacyofthisunified
visionwouldbeonewherethevaluingsubjectaswellasthequalitativeand
spiritualdimensionsofthecosmoswoulddropoutasunnecessaryandunreal.
Lightbeganastheemanationofagod,participationinwhichallowedsight;
lightbecamethemodeluponwhichallknowingwaspredicated;butfinallylight
becameamereobject,atinybilliardballpredictablybouncingaroundaccordingto
fixedquantitativelawswhosenaturecouldbereflectedbyamodestwitness.There
werediversereactionstoNewton’sunificationofthecosmos.AlexanderPope
wrotethefamousepitaph,“NatureandNature’sLawslayhidinnight:Godsaid‘Let
Newtonbe!’andallwaslight,”41whileWilliamBlakebeseeched,“MayGoduskeep/
39ModestWitness,23-24.Harawaytakestheterm“modestwitness”fromStevenShapinandSimonSchaffer’sLeviathanandtheAir-Pump:Hobbes,BoyleandtheExperimentalLife.40AShortHistoryofOptics,4-7.41FromEveryDayoftheYear,eds.JamesandMaryFord,“March21st”.
21
FromsinglevisionandNewton’ssleep.”42Whileunificationwasavirtuetosome,
Blakebringsouthowsuch“singlevision”hasmissedthemany-layerednatureof
reality.Newton’slawsandthescientificrevolutioningeneraldependonthe
divisionintoprimaryandsecondaryqualities,theformerwhichareobjective,
measurablequantitieswhilethelatterare“subjective”qualitiesliketaste,coloror
beauty.TheengravingbelowbyAlbrechtDürerfromthesameperiodcapturesthe
situationinapoignantimage:43
Theengravingbothillustratesandisdrawnaccordingtothenewtechniqueoflinear
perspective,whichportrayedtheworldasitreallywas,undistortedbythepainter’s
bias.Thecontrastcouldnotbemorestark:thehalf-naked,sensualsubjectlies
supineontheleft,herhandbarelykeepingaflowingdraperyfromrevealingher
genitals,whilethemute,immobileandmodestpainterremainsdeathlystillbehind
asinglepoint,dissectingtheobjectimagethroughalatticeworkframeinto
manageablesectionstobepainstakinglycopiedbutwhosedivisionbearno
meaningfulrelationshiptothewhole.Purequantitynowintermediatesbetween
42LetterToThomasButts,22November1802.43PerspectiveProjection,fromPicturesforGeometry,1532
22
thesubjectandobjectofknowledge—dictatingthatthesubjectbecomeamodest
witnessandtheobjectanumberedcoordinatepointontheCartesiangridofa
mathesisuniversalis.
Whilelinearperspectiveandmodernsciencecertainlycomewithgreatgifts,
ImustassertwithBlakethatsomethinghasbeenlost.Paintingeventuallyrealized
thatitspremodernancestorswerenotsimplypoorartistsbutratherwieldeda
certainexpressionismwhentheymadebabyJesuslargerthanhe“should”have
been.Carryingthisinsightforward,contemporaryartistscanabandonlinear
perspectiveinordertoexpresssomethingelsethatisnoless“real,”althoughthe
painterhasparticipatedsomethingintherendering:
AsIwillexploreinthenextsection,scientistsultimatelyhavebeenpushedtoa
similarconclusioninregardtolightandrealityitself.Itturnsoutourpremodern
ancestorsdidnotpoorlydistinguishbetweennatureandsociety,forthe
23
participatorynetworksofwhichtheyspeakturnouttobethesamediscoveredby
quantumphysics.
TheWave/ParticleControversyandConclusion
AsearlyasAristotleandDemocritustherewasadebateoverwhetherlight
wasawaveoraparticle.Ofcoursethesewerenotthetermsthatwereusedbut
Aristotlethoughtlightwasakindofdisturbancethroughanether,whileDemocritus
thoughtitwas,likeeverythingelse,composedofatoms(notouratomsbut
hypotheticaltinybitsoutofwhicheverythingwascomposedthrough
recombination).44Aftermanyyearsandmuchcontroversy,Newton’scorpuscular
theorywonthedayforatime,buteventuallyworkdonebyHooke,Huygens,
Foucault,Fresnel,YoungandMaxwellseemedtodefinitivelyturnthetablestoward
thewavetheoryoflight.ItwasonlywithEinstein’sinvestigationofthe
photoelectriceffectthattheideaofwave-particledualitywasestablished,whichled
toanumberofcompetinginterpretations.Howcanlight(andlaterthiswas
establishedforallsubatomicparticles)bebothawaveandaparticle?
44AVeryBriefHistoryofLight,30.
24
Whattheseoscillationsandseemingparadoxesindicateistheuntenabilityof
TheGreatDivide.Whilethemodestwitnessattemptstobanishtheparticipationof
thesubject,itreturnswithavengeance.ThomasYoung’sdouble-slitexperiment
initiallyseemedtoconfirmthewavenatureoflight.Inthisexperimentlightfroma
singlesourcepassesthroughtwoslitsanditsarrivalisindicatedupona
photosensitiveplateontheotherside.Iflightisaparticleitshouldappearintwo
bandswhichaccordwiththetwoslits.Iflightisawaveitshouldappearinmany
bands,which
accordwiththe
interference
patternsmade
bythewave
emittingfrom
eachslit:
Youngobtainedthelatterresult.However,Einsteinlaterdiscoveredthat
lighttravelsindiscreteparticulateunits,calledphotons.45Laterdevelopmentsin
technologyallowedtheexperimenttobeperformedonephotonatatime.Inthis
casethearrivalofeachphotoncouldbetrackedtoaspecificpointontheplate;soit
seemsthesinglephotonmusthavepassedthroughasingleslit,whichsuggeststhat
continuingtofirethemoneatatimewillaccordwiththeimageontheleftandnot
leadtointerferencepatterns,sincetherearenotmultiplephotonstointerferewith
45AVeryBriefHistoryofLight,53.
25
oneanother.Anyyetonceenoughphotonsarefired,theinterferencepatternofthe
imageontherightemerges,onephotonatatime.Thismeansthatsomehowthe
photontravelsasawaveandinterfereswithitselfandyetcondensestoasingle
pointuponreachingtheplate.Clearlyourconceptsofwaveandparticlearenot
adequatetodealwiththeactualstructureoflight.
However,themostastoundingpartoftherevisedexperimentinvolvesthe
viewer’sparticipation.Ifwestationaviewerjustinfrontofthetwoslitsandhave
himorhertrackwhichslitthephotongoesthrough,lightwillnolongerexhibit
interferencepatterns—itwillappearastheimageontheleft.Thismeansthatlight
changesitsbehaviorifsomeoneiswatching.Asphysicistspursuedthese
implicationsfurther,theydiscoveredthatsimpleconceptslike“position”and
“momentum”couldn’tbemeasuredsimultaneously.46Whiletheformerrequiresa
fixedapparatustomeasureexactlywhereaphotonorotherparticleimpacts,the
latterrequiresamovingapparatusthatcanabsorbandthusmeasurehowhardthe
particlehashit.Theapparatus,thoughseeminglyneutral,isessentiallyan
extensionoftheobserverandameansofhisorherparticipation.Thisshowsthat
evenconceptslike“position”and“momentum”arenotobserverindependent
propertiesthatbelongsolelytotheobjectsofnature.Neitheraretheymerely
constructedbythesubject,bearingnointrinsicconnectiontotheworldoutthere.
Ratherphotons,particlesandeverythingelsearequasi-objectsthataremobilized
byourparticipationandourparticularwaysofdrawingthelinesofnature,society
andahostofotherabstractions.
46MeetingtheUniverseHalfway,111-115.
26
WerecallWhitehead:“Youcannotthinkwithoutabstractions;accordingly,it
isoftheutmostimportancetobevigilantincriticallyrevisingyourmodesof
abstraction.”47Everylivingbeing,arguably,makeschoices,andthusiscarvingup
theworldinonewayoranother,evenabacterium“deciding”tomoveupasugar-
gradienttowardanincreasedfoodsupply.Butwhenpreydevelopshardshellsto
wardofftheir-predators,huntersmustrevisetheirmodesofabstractioniftheyare
nottogohungry.Thoughphysicistsarepaintersseemtohaverealizedthis,
technoscienceandthecultofmodernitystillclingtothemodestwitnessandthe
GreatDivide.Theseconceptsarewaysofmobilizingquasi-objectsandcarvingup
theworldinacertainway,buttheirstatusasabstractionshasbeenforgotten.
TheEgyptianGod,Amun-Re,wasawayofmobilizingthesun,of
understandingitasasourceofnourishment,boththroughcropsandspirit;Plato
carveduptheworlddifferently,bringingthesunintothesphereofthevisibleworld
yetusingittointimateanunseenbutintelligibleworld;DescartesandNewtonsaw
theworldlikeaclock,runningaccordingtomathematicallawsandunderstandable
throughthelightofreason,whichwasGodgiven;laterthinkersdecidedreasonwas
notGodgivenbutsimplygiven,andthatGodwasawhimsical,subjectivething.
Eachapproachhasapurchaseonrealitybuteachapproachdividesuptheworld
differently.Thegeneraltrendisfromamorecompact,networkedandparticipatory
worldview,towardamoredistinct,dividedandobjectiveview.Howevertotake
anystage,certainlythelast,asfinal,wouldbetocommittheFallacyofMisplaced
47ScienceandtheModernWorld,59.
27
Concreteness:“theaccidentalerrorofmistakingtheabstractfortheconcrete.”48
Furthermore,theinsightsofcontemporaryphysicsdiscussedabovearemuchmore
reminiscentofthenetworkedandparticipatoryworldviewthanofthemodernone,
debunkinganysimplestoryofprogress:thestructureoflightitselfhasremindedus
ofourparticipatoryorigins.Theecologicalcrisishasputourverysurvivalatstake,
innosmallmeasurebecausewehavefailedtoreviseourabstractionsandtheways
ofseeingtheworldthatarenolongerlife-enhancing.Wemustshiftourvisionof
theworldfroma“collectionofobjects”to“acommunionofsubjects,”toquote
ThomasBerry;49itisonlybyparticipatingwiththeworldaroundus,by
rediscoveringtheintimacybetweenseerandseen,thatwemayhealtheGreat
Dividesandsomaketheinsideliketheoutsideandenterthekingdomofearth.
48ScienceandtheModernWorld,51.49TheGreatWork,82.
28
BibliographyAristotle.DeAnima.NewYork:Penguin,1986.Barad,Karen.MeetingtheWorldHalfway.Durham:DukeUniversityPress,2007.Beech,Martin.“AVeryBriefHistoryofLight,”inThePhysicsofInvisibility,29-56.NewYork:Springer,2012Bellah,Robert.ReligioninHumanEvolution.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2011.Berry,Thomas.TheGreatWork.NewYork:BroadwayBooks,2000.Haraway,Donna.Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium.FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouse™.NewYork:Routledge,1997.Latour,Bruno.WeHaveNeverBeenModern.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1993.Notopoulos,JamesA.“TheSymbolismoftheSunandLightintheRepublicofPlato.I,”inClassicalPhilology,Vol.39,No.3(Jul.,1944),pp.163-172.Publishedby:UniversityofChicagoPressStableURL:http://www.jstor.org/stable/264878———.“TheSymbolismoftheSunandLightintheRepublicofPlato.II,”inClassicalPhilology,Vol.39,No.4(Oct.,1944),pp.223-240Publishedby:UniversityofChicagoPressStableURL:http://www.jstor.org/stable/266557Plato.CompleteWorks.Ed.JohnCooper.Indianapolis:Hackett,1997.Romer,Hartmann.2009.“AShortHistoryofOptics,”inTheoreticalOptics,1-13.Hoboken:Wiley-VCH.Stengers,Isabelle.ThinkingwithWhitehead.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2011.Talbot,Michael.TheHolographicUniverse.NewYork:HarperPerennial,1991.Whitehead,AlfredNorth.ScienceandtheModernWorld.NewYork:TheMacmillanCompany,1925.NewYork:TheFreePress,1967(paper).Zajonc,Arthur.1995.CatchingtheLight:TheEntwinedHistoryofLightandMind.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Top Related