This is true because if the brain could not process what the eyes see, then what we see would be random pictures that we couldn't understand. We would not recognize faces or food or literature or art.
I think the idea of our eyes limiting us to what we can see is something really ironic. The eyes are supposed to be our source of realization and understanding of the world; however, they can do just the opposite. It's interesting to think about how eyes or anything that opens our world can limit it instead. This probably seems like a really big stretch, but this whole concept reminds me of some discussion that we had last year in English class when we read "The Dumbest Generation." The book focused greatly on how technology, a source that is supposed to open opportunities and information, has in fact limited people's knowledge and ability to expand their mind. Technology often does the opposite, especially with adolescents. It has caused teenagers to become enclosed because technology makes easy access to everything, and as a consequence, the author explains, this idea of easiness had caused a lack of pursuit in the minds of teenagers. This just reminded me of how humans think that with sight everything is easy and clear and that with eyes, there is little effort that humans need to put in in order to see. However, what we depict as "easy" or something that is effortless often causes us to think beyond what is in front of us. Just as our generation has adapted to the "easiness" of technology, we are depriving ourselves of going out of our way or comfort zone to do in depth research or put in a significant amount of effort to learn something beyond what is directly in front of us and accessible. The same is with sight, for we often don't even consider thinking about what is beyond our visible sight. Our sight prohibits us from seeing anything that is beyond us and that is much more valuable and worthy, for intellectual sight is much more than what is in front of us.
Post a Comment