Kevin Vanhaelewijn, MA, MSc
The ideology of progress, which emanated from the period of Enlightenment in Europe during the 18th century, has instilled in numerous people the - perhaps often unconscious - conviction that humanity has undeniably progressed when compared to their own ancestors of the pre-Enlightenment period. The image of our technologically advanced civilization that out competes any preceding civilization dominates this historic world view and gives meaning and purpose to our own time. And yet, as we can deduce from the rise of alarmism (now called "meta crisis") and world wide activism, it also provokes the opposite sentiment of a doomed civilization that is out of control with maximization of profit driving the destruction of our natural environment and our own well-being.
Have we been ascending or descending the ladder of success?
Surely, both views cannot be right at the same time. Instead of remaining caught up in this double-think, I suggest we try to understand how such a psychological contradiction can exist in our modern culture by treating it as a cultural illusion which is related to the phenomenon of impossible objects such as the Penrose stairs. By doing this, it could offer us not only a grip on the problem but it might help us to become more conscious of it and develop a more balanced self-image within our larger historical identity.
Making the impossible possible
In 1954, the famous mathematician Roger Penrose was introduced to the art works of Escher in Amsterdam. Intrigued by his mastery of impossible optical illusions, Penrose set out to create something “impossible” himself. His impossible triangle was the result, which in turn prompted his father Lionel to create others, among which the impossible stairs. The importance of these and other optical illusions reaches well beyond the technical mathematical sphere because it gives us - quite literally - an insight in how our perception is not a passive receiver, but indeed, interprets reality according to its own logic. After thinking it through, the Penrose’s saw their finding as psychologically relevant and decided to publish their impossible objects in the British Journal of Psychology.
Penrose triangle (1958)
Sculpture of the Penrose triangle, Brian MacKay & Ahmad Abas, Perth, Australia
Two dimensional objects such as the Penrose triangle, which inspired the creation of the Penrose stairs, cannot exist in the physical world even though they trick our mind to create the illusion of being a possibility in a three dimensional world. In reality, they are two dimensional images that hide the fact that their lines are not touching everywhere (the triangle as well as the stairs each have a gap), something which would only reveal itself if we would view them from a different angle. Therefore, the illusion only works with a specific viewing angle over which the observer has no power as it remains fixed in the static image in a two dimensional world.
The impossible progress to the top
Penrose stairs (1958)
Each part of the structure is acceptable as representing a flight of steps but the connections are such that the picture, as a whole, is inconsistent: the steps continually descend in a clockwise direction. (Penrose & Penrose 1958: 31)
The most interesting example of such an impossible object, at least for our purpose here, is symbolized by the Penrose stairs. Humankind has a longstanding symbolically laden relationship with height, ascension and the sky in general. In many religions and cultures, “higher” is associated with “better”, whether it be in the sense of something godly (above and superior to human) or simply of a higher rank in power. It is from here that the ideology of progress probably becomes associated with a form of perceived ascension: climbing up and reaching the peak of the mountain, or flying up into the sky and even conquering outer space. It is these images of ascension and how human intelligence conquers the sky itself, in which the essence of progress easily finds itself represented.
As the Penrose’s noted in their paper, one can create an impossible object that appears to be consistent at the level of its parts. In the Penrose stairs, each step can be followed as one goes either up or down the flight, without ever noticing any problem at all. And yet, logically and beyond our perceptive abilities, we know that we could not really be ascending or descending the whole time because we always end up where we started. The Penrose stairs reveal themselves as a closed loop of endless repetition, yet a repetition of what exactly? Inside the illusion, it consists of perpetual ascending or descending. Outside the illusion, however, and thus beyond our immediate perception, there must be the endless repetition of an error, followed by a repetitive mistake made by our interpreting perception.
What can we learn from such an optical illusion besides from the fact that our perception can be tricked, which is a fact that has been known for many centuries by now?
Firstly, these optical illusions show us how humans can indeed create things that appear to be realistic and possible when they are in fact not. If we imagine for a moment the Penrose stairs representing the leading narrative of Progress, showing us how we have been ascending the stairs of improvement step by step, it becomes understandable how it is able to present itself as being irrefutable whilst at the same time it is illogical. Even in the face of so many catastrophes on a scale never seen before, it becomes feasible to imagine that a certain fixed perspective in the mind - in this case the fixation on certain technological progress and globalization - creates the shared illusion of a wholesome self-image that has brought overall improvement.
Secondly, it also demonstrates that our mechanistic and reductionist philosophy, which dominates our sciences and technological thinking, does not just shape the world in which we live: it also guides our own perception and shapes our interpretation of it. In this way, the closed loop of the narrative is achieved. Its power naturally lies in the ability to focus on parts and details. At the same time, it prevents us from perceiving the whole which requires very different perceptive abilities. The logic of the parts dominates the logic of the whole even though it is less fundamental.
The paradox of superiority
Every year, new technologies are being developed which open up new possibilities. Whether it be in robotics, digital health systems, weather control or nano-engineering, there seems to be no area of life which will escape the ever increasing sphere of technological control and dependence. The world possesses more wealth, food and resources than ever before, and yet poverty, inequality, war, natural disasters and diseases keep plaguing us. The technological utopia is as far away as it ever was: always tomorrow, just a day away.
This is the paradox of a civilization and its mechanistic philosophy which deems itself superior, yet has no control over its own destructive capabilities that threaten all life on earth. Therefore, we must not only question this idea of superiority, we must analyze from where it arises and why it persists in the face of its numerous failures. Just like the Penrose triangle and stairs do not show any gaps, likewise, the perspective of Progress hides the obvious gaps in our own self-image and of the world we have created within this mechanistic paradigm. It pretends as if it has nothing to do with these gaps and hypnotizes us into believing that it alone can solve these problems. Through our fixed gaze of mechanical Progress, the essence of this paradigm is hidden away as we try to solve the ruptures it causes within that same paradigm.
It is clear that it is not easy for people to change their perspective on this issue as they blindly keep following the narrative of technological rulership which is perceived as inevitable. Is it the fascination with impossible things that hypnotizes people in this perspective? Or is it the shock of a shattered dream of Enlightenment that prevents us from waking up from this illusion of contradictions? These are important questions that need to be raised in public discourse.
One thing is certain: Changing one’s perspective requires the sacrifice of this perfect impossible image of the modern world. Perhaps we should seek the needed strength and faith elsewhere in order to overcome this obstacle on which we have become dependent. Looking back, without looking down, perhaps we can still learn from the needed different perspectives by which our ancestors lived and which have been erased from our cultural memory.
Sources:
L. S. Penrose, R. Penrose (1958). "Impossible Objects: A Special Type of Visual Illusion". The British Journal of Psychology. 49 (1): 31–33
Comments