Eidetics
Discussion
The Theory of the Image
Fred Polak:
"In this work we are, in a sense, taking the existence of images of the future as given and tracing out the effects of their existence on the course of history. In doing so we are deliberately starting in the middle of the story, so to speak, and apparently ignoring the beginning, the problem of images in general and how they are formed. We offer no excuses for this, because it is the business of the mind to begin work at the point of major insight. The image of the future does represent such a major insight, and carries within itself its own intellectual imperatives for a further working out of the idea. This procedure seems all the more justified since, according to our thesis, it is the image of the future that forms a dynamic fac;:tor par excellence and an extremely powerful force contained in the working of all images as such. Therefore, the dynamics of the images of the future, which we treat separately in this book, have a special relevance for a theory of the image in general. We cannot and do not wish to ignore the problem of a systematic theory of the image, however, and would like to consider this work as a small contribution to general image theory.
The more general theory of images may be thought of as "eidetics." This concept, derived from the Greek eidelon, "image," has a long history. Plato, Epicurus, and Democritus used the term to refer to knowledge and the learning process. Francis Bacon made similar use of it. The term eidetisch appears in the writings of the German psychologists, especially E. R. Jaensch, who specialized in research on children between the ages of thirteen and fifteen. Jaensch related certain types of eidetic endowments to physical constitution (Korperbau) and to personality type. On the basis of this he later outlined a theory of the development of culture. The concept recently appeared in slightly changed form in a book by the economist Kenneth E. Boulding.
...
In a general theory, attention must be given to the dynamics of
image formation, both in the private and the public mind, and the
function of images in the economy of the individual personality and
the social, national; or cultural group. What do images mean, how are
the meanings transmitted, and how do they affect individual and
social behavior? Under what conditions do images change, and why'?
What can accelerate or retard these changes? How amenable are they
to purposeful manipulation, in both the short and the long run? We
hope that some light is thrown on all these questions by our study of
images of the future.
One of the strongest links between images and the image of the future is contained in the Book of Genesis, where we are told that God created man in His image. It would be wrong to suppose, however, that the use of images to capture the future is limited to the spheres of religion and mythology. Such images are always present and operative in all social groups.
...
We have already stated that this work singles out the image of the
future because we are convinced it is the time-dimension of the
future that acts as a pre-eminently dynamic force in the working of
all images. In analyzing how the concept of the future has operated
in the historical process, there are six main aspects that come into
play:
- Images of the future are always aristocratic in origin. The
author of the image invariably belongs to the creative minority of a society. He moves in the company of Isaiah, Socrates, Rembrandt, the French philosophes, and nearer to our own day, such men as Henri Bergson and H. G. Wells. The formation of images of the future depends upon an awareness of the future that makes possible a conscious, voluntary, and responsible choice between alternatives. This means that the development of images of the future and ethics are intimately related. Human judgments can, to a great extent, be explained in relation to the striving toward a highly valued future goal. The development of ethics and moral philosophy is one aspect of the development of techniques for visualizing and controlling the future and the image of the future receives much of its driving force from ethics. Kant's ethics-reduced to his famous categorical imperative the whole field of Sollen, "ought," as distinct from Sein, "is," and' Wirklichkeit, "reality," as opposed to Wert, "value,"-are all based on a time-dimension hitherto never clearly delineated. They can all be effectively translated into the language of the image of the future. They all express the underlying philosophy of what we ca~l influence-optimism. Man, in this process of ethical development, IS no longer simply "split man," capable of dividing his perceptions into two realms. He now becomes "moral man," responsible for the use to which he puts his perceptions and powers for reaching the Other and better. At this point the positive image of the future in its classic form becomes one of the main instruments of culture, providing both a vision of civilization and the tools for ~ealizing ~t.
- The propagation of images. The force that drives the Image of
the future is only in part rational and intellectual; a much larger part is emotional, aesthetic, and spiritual. The appeal of the image lies in its picture of a radically different world in an Other time. "