What is the truth behind optical illusions? âMy Wife and My Mother-in-Lawâ is a well-known optical illusion that presents two different images in one. It was created by the British cartoonist W.E. Hill in 1915. The drawing cleverly shifts between two perspectives: you can either see a young lady looking away or an older woman with a large nose and chin.
The paradox of all optical illusions is that the viewerâs mind cannot see two images simultaneously. It has to switch. This presents a huge philosophical conundrum â if people can look at the same thing but see two different pictures, how can we tell if thereâs an objective reality? It all depends on what you focus on.
The âahaâ moment comes when we discover the two pictures. Of course, we canât see them simultaneously, but we can switch between them. The very act of switching seems magical in and of itself â after all, we see that every line in every image is exactly in its place. Yet, the brain cannot perceive two things simultaneously â no matter how much we try.
So, what is objective reality? Can I look at something and definitively say, âThis isâŠâ? Unless I question how I see before I decide what I see, I donât really see. The âhow I seeâ always precedes âwhat I see.â Unless I question my semantics and see how I see, I will be under the illusion of seeing. As Jesus said, âThough seeing, they do not see.â
If I absolutize my way of seeing â my semantics â I will create an idol. I will say, âThereâs nothing else to see here besides what I see.â The absolutization of one perspective is the end of true seeing. It is semantic idolatry. An idol always arrests our gaze and does not let us see beyond.
The opposite of semantic idolatry is semantic transcendence. The moment I realize there are at least two pictures to see, I stop absolutizing my own. I start switching between the two. But I donât absolutize the second one either. Both are but shadows of reality, not reality itself.
When I realize that the âreal switchingâ is not between the two pictures (or two cultural semantics) but between shadows and Truth, I start seeing. My eyes open. Itâs not just a young lady or just an old woman. These are but shadows of reality. They are symbols that must be transcended. When I realize that my way of seeing is symbolic, I realize that all the symbols are real inasmuch as I see through them, not at them.
Shadows are not absolute. The Absolute lies beyond the shadows. In the Absolute, opposites converge.
âGod is the coincidence of opposites.â Nicholas of Cusa
In God, all contradictions converge and are reconciled. Now we see partially, as in a mirror. Then, we will see face to face. In God, we see two (or more) pictures at the same time without having to switch between them because we see with the heart, not the mind. The heart perceives an old woman in every young lady and a young lady in every old woman. It doesnât mistake a symbol for reality. It transcends the shadows and becomes sane.
âThe ordinary man has always been sane because the ordinary man has always been a mystic⊠He has always had one foot in earth and the other in fairyland⊠If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them. His spiritual sight is stereoscopic, like his physical sight: he sees two different pictures at once and yet sees all the better for that.â G.K. Chesterton (Orthodoxy)
In God, we see two things simultaneously. The mind cannot grasp the Whole â it has to switch. The heart can. Mystical vision is stereoscopic. It allows me to see the Whole without sacrificing either part. The moment I see God, I start seeing The Face behind every face.
Check on Amazon!
