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.