“Man’s ability to see is in decline. Those who nowadays concern themselves with culture and education will experience this fact again and again. We do not mean here, of course, the physiological sensitivity of the human eye. We mean here the spiritual capacity to perceive the visible reality as it truly is.”
Josef Pieper, “Learning How to See Again,” in Only the Lover Sings
There are of course different ways in which we humans see. While Pieper refers here to a ‘spiritual capacity,’ he still means the seeing we do with our eyes. Later he will assert that such seeing is the first step toward the mental or rational ‘seeing’ that most characterizes us as human.
We need to be concerned about the power of sight. The ‘physiological’ aspect of human seeing is not the point of concern; such would be addressed by nutrition, or glasses, or other things pertaining to the medical art.
At issue here is how much we really see in our field of vision. Consider the difference between two men looking at the same outdoor scene. One man might see—or we can say ‘perceive’ or ‘notice’—much more than the other; and this regardless of which one needs glasses or not!
Much goes into our ability to see, even just on the animal or sensory level. For instance, experience of looking with attention brings about a store of remembered images as well as a habit of noticing, both of which heighten our ability to see. On the other hand, Pieper remarks, “There does exist something like visual noise, which just like the acoustical counterpart, makes clear perception impossible.”
What makes for better seeing, and what works against it, are well worth our closer examination.
Such is the beauty and the challenge of being a rational animal. We must concern ourselves with sensory and sensible realities, as essential to the highest aspects of human life.
In the next two weeks we will look at two practical suggestions Pieper offers: the first is a negative discipline, of avoiding ‘visual noise,’ and the second is a positive discipline to develop our visual powers.
Learning How to See Again Mini-Series
This is the first in a series: Learning How to See Again. Find the other posts below!
I. The Ability to See with Our Own Eyes
III: Learning to See by Drawing
Josef Pieper (1904-1997) was a German philosopher in the tradition of St. Thomas Aquinas. Many of his works have been translated into English and are still in print, including Leisure the Basis of Culture, Happiness and Contemplation, A Theory of Festivity, and The Four Cardinal Virtues, to name a few.
Husband, father, and professor of Philosophy. LifeCraft springs from one conviction: there is an ancient wisdom about how to live the good life in our homes, with our families; and it is worth our time to hearken to it. Let’s rediscover it together. Learn more.
Thank you, Prof. Cuddeback. Your observations and comments motivate us to consider how sensible forms can be regarded, at times, as a vestment for an unseen, deeper reality. This Wednesday reflection encourages one to re-think the common assumption (prominent in a significant segment of our culture) that all glory and honor belongs to youth and bodily beauty – for, the capacity to truly *see* grows in strength with years, with experience, as your bird example indicates. Not only that, but the end of your video revealed that advancement in age is not sufficient for this capacity to see, but *effort*, too, is necessary – effort to attain this peculiar perspicacity. Looking forward to the follow-up videos.
Thanks Brian. I’m looking forward to working on the follow-up too.
Thank you for the wonderful reflection, Dr. Cuddeback. I was wondering if you have read Rudyard Kipling’s “Kim?” If so, what do you think of the observational training Kim undergoes under the tutelage of Lurgan Sahib? Do you think this might fit into what Pieper is talking about or is it of a different kind, perhaps being ordered to different ends?
Stephen, Would you believe that somehow Kim slipped through the cracks of my education, and it has been near the top of my to-read list for years. I think I simply need to bump it up. May I trouble you to give me your thought on the training Kim undergoes? You have really peeked my interest. Thanks for asking.
How about Carlos Castaneda?
Never could figure out if what he reported was true or if it was just good fiction.
I did spend some effort on trying to see myself in my dreams.
Sorry, but that’s beyond my knowledge…
I am intrigued by this reflection on “seeing.” Although I love looking at beautiful things, art, nature, etc., I have never considered myself very “observant.” I am not a “people watcher” nor do I usually notice details. I am very interested to learn more about Pieper’s suggestions for cultivating a habit of “seeing,” both in your future reflections and in “Only the Lover Sings.”
Angela, I too do not consider myself very observant. I’m going to be experimenting a bit on this matter, and I look forward to looking more into this and sharing some more thoughts soon.
Interesting comments there. Surprised to see people actually say they are “not very observant.” Is being observant nature or nuture? Good question. Next there those who are very observant of others’ feelings and motivations yet they are not observant of the physical world around them. I’m not very good at observing those human interactions yet I walk into an environment and immediately see anything that is amiss. I can spot an animal in a herd that is just a little off. I can walk through thousands of plants in the greenhouses and instantly see the ones with bugs. I walked by the giant wood stove this afternoon and instantly saw that the color of the door had changed suggesting that it had overheated somehow. I see too much. That is why my work never ends.
Your evocative meditation caused me to recall a quote from an author, Teilhard de Chardin, from whom I drank deeply in my younger days: “The history of the living world can be reduced to the elaboration of ever more perfect eyes at the heart of a cosmos where it is always possible to discern more. Are not the perfection of an animal and the supremacy of the thinking being measured by the penetration and power of synthesis of their glance? To try to see more and to see better is not, therefore, just a fantasy, curiosity, or a luxury. See or perish. This is the situation imposed on every element of the universe by the mysterious gift of existence. And thus, to a higher degree, this is the human condition.” Thank you for jogging that memory of an old friend and how he led me to see “seeing” in much the same way you suggest.
Thanks Newton. Though I have some issues with some of de Chardin’s principles, he offers a very powerful and provocative formulation.
Hi Dr. Cuddeback,
It is a wonderful anecdote you mentioned regarding your friend in the tree stand who enjoys sitting and looking. I’m not sure if I’m on the right track but I imagine a few things present – first a stillness, then the act of looking as you mentioned, but also a relaxed underlying openness or appreciation. Taking in and allowing that which was seen to adjust understanding, impact, transform or inform. Also present was the foundation of a life lived with the habit of looking and seeing in such moments and thus as with the nuthatch, a foundation that adds to appreciation and context. I wonder, did you, after wondering what he was seeing, look at the scene with a different perspective yourself? Did your observation of him then change something for you in that moment?
Malia, First of all I think you’re thinking very clearly about the issue. And you raise a great question. You know, as I look back, I wish I could say that I turned and looked at the scene with heightened attention. I think I was actually more taken at the moment with him, and I was thinking about him, rather than looking at what he was looking at. I feel now I want to go back that spot, and just sit and look myself. Surely we can learn to look, in some sense, through the eyes of others.