When you’re used to darkness, light can be blinding

Nik S. writes:

I hope you are well. I had not looked at your site in a while until last night, and I was reminded of why I had stopped reading it—the words are blindingly brilliant!

LA replies:

You stopped reading VFR because it was brilliant?

Tonight I’m in pain.

Nik S. replies:

Lol, when you’re around dullards all the time, sometimes it’s hard to make the “character-switch.” I just get used to thinking dumb, sad to say.

Actually I stopped reading for a while not because of the brilliance itself, but because the brilliance was blinding to me. (kinda like someone who steps out of a dark cave and is blinded by the light).

LA replies:

It’s funny you should say that. When I was 13 or 14 years old, I wrote a short story about a man who is lost in a cave, a pitch black cave, where he’s been wandering, lost, for a long, long time. Then he sees a light in the distance, he rushes eagerly toward it, it’s an opening in the cave! He breaks out of the cave into the daylight, he’s in a state of jubilation, but he’s dazzled by the sunlight, he’s blinded by the sunlight, and in his state of blindness and confusion, he falls into another cave. That’s how the story ends, with him trapped in the darkness of another cave.

I showed the story to my brother, who was in college at the time, and he told me that this was like Plato’s Cave, in The Republic. That was the first time I heard of Plato.

Nik S. replies:

LOL.

I like the part about falling into another cave—that would have been a nice addition to Plato’s original tale.

Is that part about falling into another cave, did you make that up, or was that Plato’s addition?

LA replies:

Well I hadn’t read Plato when I wrote it, that was why my brother, who had just read Plato’s Republic in college, was impressed. In Plato’s account of the Cave, the Cave is lit by fires, and the people in the cave can only face the wall, and can only see shadows of humans moving on the wall, and think these shadows are reality. And if they are brought out to see the real light of the sun, they are at first dazzled by it. They don’t fall into another cave, but they are blinded by the sun, as in my story, so that the only way to bring them safely from the cave up to the sunlight is to do it gradually and by stages so that they can be accustomed to it.

So how did I get the idea for the story at age 13? I think that it was just a true idea, that if you’re shown too much of the truth all at once, you can’t take it, you’re blinded by it (which is also the experience you described to me), and so, by being shown too much of the truth all at once, you may end up worse off than you were before.

Here it is, from the beginning of Book VII of The Republic, translated by Benjamin Jowett, 1901 (not a translation I’m familiar with, but it’s the one I found on the Web):

AND now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened: Behold! human beings living in an underground den, which has a mouth open toward the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette-players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.

I see.

And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.

You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.

Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?

True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?

And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?

Yes, he said.

And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?

Very true.

And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?

No question, he replied.

To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.

That is certain.

And now look again, and see what will naturally follow if the prisoners are released and disabused of their error. At first, when any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his neck round and walk and look toward the light, he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see the realities of which in his former state he had seen the shadows; and then conceive someone saying to him, that what he saw before was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching nearer to being and his eye is turned toward more real existence, he has a clearer vision—what will be his reply? And you may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and requiring him to name them—will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him?

Far truer.

And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not have a pain in his eyes which will make him turn away to take refuge in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are now being shown to him?

True, he said.

And suppose once more, that he is reluctantly dragged up a steep and rugged ascent, and held fast until he is forced into the presence of the sun himself, is he not likely to be pained and irritated? When he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled, and he will not be able to see anything at all of what are now called realities.

Not all in a moment, he said.

He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and the stars and the spangled heaven; and he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the sun or the light of the sun by day?

Certainly.

Last of all he will be able to see the sun, and not mere reflections of him in the water, but he will see him in his own proper place, and not in another; and he will contemplate him as he is.

Certainly.

He will then proceed to argue that this is he who gives the season and the years, and is the guardian of all that is in the visible world, and in a certain way the cause of all things which he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold?

Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason about him.

And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the den and his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself on the change, and pity him?

Certainly, he would.

And if they were in the habit of conferring honors among themselves on those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows and to remark which of them went before, and which followed after, and which were together; and who were therefore best able to draw conclusions as to the future, do you think that he would care for such honors and glories, or envy the possessors of them? Would he not say with Homer,

“Better to be the poor servant of a poor master,”

and to endure anything, rather than think as they do and live after their manner?

Yes, he said, I think that he would rather suffer anything than entertain these false notions and live in this miserable manner.

Imagine once more, I said, such a one coming suddenly out of the sun to be replaced in his old situation; would he not be certain to have his eyes full of darkness?

To be sure, he said.

And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the den, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable), would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if anyone tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.

No question, he said.

This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upward to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed—whether rightly or wrongly, God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally either in public or private life must have his eye fixed.

I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you.

Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may be trusted.

Yes, very natural.

- end of initial entry -

Terry Morris writes:

Interesting exchange between you and Nik S. Is there a remedy to Nik’s situation? Why don’t you suggest a pair of sunglasses which can be put on and taken off as needed, and can assist in the slow acclimation of his eyes to the brightness of VFR.

This wouldn’t work with someone like Chris Roach, of course, who I suspect experiences the same difficulties when reading you—too bright. The difference between Nik and people like Chris is that the latter think that if they’re experiencing any kind of discomfort it is not up to them to do anything about it, it is completely up to the other party. Nik recognizes that the source of his discomfort is not necessarily (and likely not) VFR, but himself. Therefore he’s capable of understanding that he, not you, is responsible for overcoming this handicap if that is what he wishes to do. It’s the difference between a conservative self-governing individual, and a liberal dependent.


Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 30, 2008 02:09 AM | Send
    

Email entry

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):