There Is No Innocent Eye
17
Bear in mind that light penetrates as far as the retina and no further, and
there is no mental periscope to convey the optical image deeper into the brain.
Thus, the data the brain operates on is a code which represents abstract general
features of a scene. The optical aspects of vision end at the eyes. 5
The processed visual information emerges into awareness in the form of
a cognitive structure which reproduces all the aspects of a scene which are
important to the observer. One of the most important insights of contemporary
brain science is that the visual world is a constructed reality. When we look, what
we hold in awareness is not an optical array but a mental construct, built from
information in the array, which presents us with all that is of value to us in a
scene.
What we see when we look at an object or scene is a reconstruction of the
optical array, recast as an experiential schema. It is a picture for us because that
is what we imagine a picture to be. For us, a picture is organized in a form
revealing shape and object details, not an optically accurate matrix of dark
and light patches. What we see is precisely what we imagine that the world
looks like. So for us, we are seeing a truer picture of the world: It corresponds
faithfully to our world model, whereas the optical array does not.
This is a very important theme in modern philosophy: It is called indirect
perception, because we are not directly experiencing the optical manifold, but
a reconstituted version of it. We know the world through our senses, and have
no access to the background reality which brings about, or generates, our sense
impressions. Thus, everything we know is one step removed from reality. It is
in that sense that vision is indirect.
As noted a moment ago, what we experience when we look at things is a
“true” picture of the world, because what our brain has constructed is precisely
what a picture is for us. We believe that what we see is exactly what the world
looks like. But that’s silly, because to look like is something in the mind. The
bare material world of objects does not “look like” anything.
The picture we see is called a representation of the scene, and the claim
that what you see are representations (rather than naked reality) is called
representationalism. To deny representationalism is to assert that it is somehow possible for the mind to perceive reality “as it truly is”. This is a debate
which has a long pedigree in philosophy, and will be discussed further in a later
chapter.
Philosopher Ernst Gombrich speaks about the myth of the innocent eye.
According to this myth, people such as artists and poets are able to perceive
a pristine world in which every object appears as it is, in its primal authenticity, uncontaminated by the demands which animal vision places on the
shapes of things. Gombrich correctly asserts that there is no innocent eye, for
17
Bear in mind that light penetrates as far as the retina and no further, and
there is no mental periscope to convey the optical image deeper into the brain.
Thus, the data the brain operates on is a code which represents abstract general
features of a scene. The optical aspects of vision end at the eyes. 5
The processed visual information emerges into awareness in the form of
a cognitive structure which reproduces all the aspects of a scene which are
important to the observer. One of the most important insights of contemporary
brain science is that the visual world is a constructed reality. When we look, what
we hold in awareness is not an optical array but a mental construct, built from
information in the array, which presents us with all that is of value to us in a
scene.
What we see when we look at an object or scene is a reconstruction of the
optical array, recast as an experiential schema. It is a picture for us because that
is what we imagine a picture to be. For us, a picture is organized in a form
revealing shape and object details, not an optically accurate matrix of dark
and light patches. What we see is precisely what we imagine that the world
looks like. So for us, we are seeing a truer picture of the world: It corresponds
faithfully to our world model, whereas the optical array does not.
This is a very important theme in modern philosophy: It is called indirect
perception, because we are not directly experiencing the optical manifold, but
a reconstituted version of it. We know the world through our senses, and have
no access to the background reality which brings about, or generates, our sense
impressions. Thus, everything we know is one step removed from reality. It is
in that sense that vision is indirect.
As noted a moment ago, what we experience when we look at things is a
“true” picture of the world, because what our brain has constructed is precisely
what a picture is for us. We believe that what we see is exactly what the world
looks like. But that’s silly, because to look like is something in the mind. The
bare material world of objects does not “look like” anything.
The picture we see is called a representation of the scene, and the claim
that what you see are representations (rather than naked reality) is called
representationalism. To deny representationalism is to assert that it is somehow possible for the mind to perceive reality “as it truly is”. This is a debate
which has a long pedigree in philosophy, and will be discussed further in a later
chapter.
Philosopher Ernst Gombrich speaks about the myth of the innocent eye.
According to this myth, people such as artists and poets are able to perceive
a pristine world in which every object appears as it is, in its primal authenticity, uncontaminated by the demands which animal vision places on the
shapes of things. Gombrich correctly asserts that there is no innocent eye, for