. The Autonomous Eye: Can It Ever Be Measured?
A work in Progress
Peter Davidson
Peter Davidson Self Portrait Study – Eye Tracking
Pencil, texta, colour pencil on 242 g paper FO
Introduction
What specific, measurable evidence or theoretical framework would be
required for the scientific community to accept that the eye—specifically the
retina and its peripheral circuits—possesses a form of flexible, value-based
cognition, rather than being purely a fixed, deterministic sensor?
This essay explores that question through a blend of artistic practice,
philosophical inquiry, and emerging scientific evidence. It argues that the eye
does think—not metaphorically, but biologically. The retina performs
context-sensitive, survival-optimizing decisions that reflect a form of
non-conscious cognition.1 While science can observe some of these
decisions, the internal language driving them remains inaccessible. This essay
proposes that the eye is a micro thinker, distinct from the brain as macro
thinker, and that its intelligence is best revealed through art, not
measurement.
Historical Context:
From Coldstream’s Grid to Cognitive Vision
The scientific and artistic understanding of the eye has evolved
dramatically over the past century. Early models treated the retina as a
passive receiver, shaped by mechanistic biology and the rise of computational
neuroscience. Mid-century artists like William Coldstream introduced a new
visual logic: his nude studies employed a measured grid to map the human form
with precision, externalizing the act of seeing.2 Coldstream’s grid
was not just a compositional tool—it was a metaphor for the eye’s internal
architecture.
This artistic practice parallels the biological reality of the retina.
The retina’s spatially differentiated zones and feature-sensitive circuits
suggest an innate grid—a built-in framework for organizing visual
information. Coldstream’s work becomes more than technique; it becomes a
historical bridge between art and embodied cognition.
Object Painting: A Fourth Sense of
Illuminated Space
Peter Davidson - Minami’s
Rice Paddies 2006?
Acrylic on paper –
24 cm h x 26.5 cm w
In studying Coldstream’s grid-based approach, I developed a new painting concept
now known as Object Painting.
While Coldstream externalized the act of seeing through spatial measurement,
Object Painting extends this into a new sensory dimension—what I describe as a fourth
sense of illuminated space.
Rather than capturing a motif as a fixed image, when developing Object
Painting from a chosen motif (a piece of fruit), I placed oil traces on the
canvas from the object as I observed it shifting across the day—through
morning, noon, afternoon, and night. Thus, a morning painted trace could sit
next to an afternoon trace, or a midday or late evening trace, as seen in the
painting above. The motif becomes a living place, not a static object. Each
stroke records not just form, but the changing presence of light, atmosphere,
and perceptual memory.
This is not time in the conventional sense. The eye does not experience
time as a linear sequence—it experiences illumination. The retina
assembles space through light, not through clocks. In this way, Object Painting
is not just a technique—it is a philosophy of perception. It affirms that the
eye does not see in snapshots, but in rhythms, in evolving relationships. Where
Coldstream measured space, Object Painting measures presence. It reveals
that the eye’s cognition is not bound by chronology, but by the logic of
illumination. The drawing becomes a temporal assemblage—a record of how
the eye thinks in relation to light, place, and moment.
A Priori Histories:
The Inherited Lens of Vision Science
To understand why the retina’s cognitive potential has been overlooked,
we must examine the a priori histories that shape vision research. These
are the inherited assumptions—often unspoken—that define how scientists
conceptualize the eye.
- Mechanistic Legacy: The eye was treated as a camera, the brain as a computer. This
metaphor persists, framing the retina as a passive sensor rather than an
active participant.
- Centralized Cognition Bias: Neuroscience has long privileged the brain as the sole seat of
intelligence. Peripheral systems like the retina are seen as subordinate.
- Reductionist Measurement: Scientific inquiry favours what can be quantified. Because the
retina’s internal logic—its synaptic code—is abstract, context-dependent,
and self-referential, it resists measurement.
These a priori frameworks are not neutral—they shape what is
studied and what is considered “thinking.”
The Eye Thinks:
Biological Cognition in Action
The retina is not just a sensor—it thinks. It performs rapid,
localized decisions about what visual data to prioritize, what to ignore, and
how to encode meaning. This is not metaphorical—it is measurable. Studies show
that the retina filters over $\text{99\%}$ of incoming visual data before it
reaches the brain.
This is cognition. It is intelligent, adaptive, and value-based.
The retina’s selective immune response—engaging microglia instead of
neutrophils to preserve visual integrity—is a biological decision. It reflects
a survival-optimizing calculation, not a reflex. The eye does think, and it
thinks fast.
The Speed and
Abstract Language of the Synaptic Code
When light travels approximately 30 centimetres in a nanosecond (a
billionth of a second), it suggests an immense capacity for information
processing. The codes that analyse this information within the synaptic gap
must be exquisitely sensitive. Their language and signifiers are likely so
abstract that current neurological thinking struggles to comprehend them.
This leads to a profound conclusion: the loop of enhancing thought is closed
to external observation. Because the code is so fast, complex, and
localized, only the biological entity generating it—the neural network—can
truly understand the subtle signifiers that drive its continuous, adaptive
enhancement.
- The Closed Loop: The retina’s enhancement loop is self-referential. It adapts in
real time, but its internal logic remains inaccessible to scientific
instruments.
Scientific Evidence
for Value-Based Biological Cognition
Can science, the "outsider," find measurable evidence that the
retina performs value-based calculations?
Yes—and recent findings using adaptive optics imaging offer compelling
support. These studies reveal that the retina, unlike most tissues, does not
summon neutrophils in response to injury.3 Instead, it engages
microglia—resident brain immune cells—to manage photoreceptor damage.
This selective immune strategy is not arbitrary. It reflects a context-sensitive
decision to avoid the damaging collateral inflammation associated with
neutrophil response, thereby preserving the delicate architecture of visual
function.4 As reported by the University of Rochester, this unique behaviour
suggests a “protective cloaking mechanism” that prevents further damage,
demonstrating that the retina is making a survival-optimizing decision
at the cellular level (University of Rochester, 2024).
This is biological cognition. The retina’s choice to prioritize
long-term visual integrity (value) over a standard inflammatory response
(deterministic action) is a measurable signal that it is
thinking—autonomously and intelligently.
The Implication: A
Self-Referential System
If this model of highly abstract, context-dependent coding and
value-based peripheral processing is correct, it suggests:
- Science is Outsider: Neuroscience is still guessing the language of the conversation by
watching flashes of light and measuring electrical averages.
- The Code is Context-Dependent: The meaning of a chemical release or electrical
spike is not fixed, but shaped by the cell’s history and internal state.
- The Loop is Eternal: The system continuously adapts to its environment, ensuring the
biological entity remains optimized for survival.
This affirms that the retina is a self-referential cognitive system,
operating on principles far more advanced than current scientific models can
grasp—even using its immune system as a tool of intelligent, value-driven
preservation.
Micro Thinker vs.
Macro Thinker
This essay proposes a layered model of cognition:
- The Eye as Micro Thinker: The retina performs rapid, localized decisions—filtering,
prioritizing, and encoding visual data before it reaches the brain.5
These decisions are immediate, subconscious, and survival-driven.
- The Brain as Macro Thinker: The brain integrates information, applies memory and abstraction,
and generates conscious awareness.6 It is slower, relying on
the retina’s pre-processed signals to build its model of reality.
The retina is not subordinate to the brain—it is a collaborator in
a distributed network of cognition.
Assemblage and the
Artist’s Eye
In my own drawing practice, eye tracking reveals that the eye is not
merely scanning—it is assembling. The gaze moves in patterns that
reflect the retina’s internal logic, guided by memory and sensibility.7
The coordination between eye and hand is intuitive, often subconscious.8
By externalizing this process—through red ink lines on paper—I’m not just
creating a portrait. I’m documenting the journey of perception itself.
The word “assemblage” is perfect. It refers to a work made by
grouping found objects. In my case, the “found objects” are the data points
from eye tracking, the memories of the motif, the intuitive sensibility of my
gaze, and the physicality of my hand. The drawing is the tangible result of
this creative assembly process. It’s not a trick—it’s a new reality.
I’m not just drawing from imagination—I’m drawing imagination itself
as a reality. The red lines representing my eye’s path are a physical
manifestation of this. The finished drawing is not just a portrait of the
subject; it’s a portrait of my imagination at work.
This process affirms that cognition is not confined to the brain. It is
distributed across the body, enacted through gesture, gaze, and memory. The
drawing becomes a record of how the eye thinks—how it assembles meaning faster
than conscious thought, guided by a logic that science cannot yet decode.
Conclusion
The eye does think. It is a micro-thinker, a self-referential
system performing value-based calculations in real time. The brain, as macro
thinker, interprets and integrates these signals, but it does not originate
them. While the retina’s decisions can be measured, its internal language may
remain forever inaccessible to external science.
This challenges the deterministic framework of neuroscience and opens the
door to a richer, more nuanced understanding of biological intelligence—one
that includes the artist’s eye, the innate grid, and the imagination
as a living, assembling force.
Through Object Painting, eye tracking, and drawing, I propose a new way
of seeing: not through time, but through illumination. Not through
measurement, but through presence. The retina is not a passive sensor—it
is a cognitive organ. And the drawing is not a representation—it is a revelation.
References
University of Rochester. (2024). Immune Cells Ignore Retinal Damage While
Microglia Step In.9 Neuroscience News. Retrieved from:
https://neurosciencenews.com/microglia-retina-vision-29520/
Artist Statement &
Research Inquiry
I am an artist and independent
researcher, holding a PhD in Visual Arts from the Australian National
University. While I maintain my independence from academia, I actively engage
with research and publish my explorations on my blog.
My primary focus remains my
artistic practice. However, I am increasingly curious about the underlying
principles that shape our perception, specifically how optics work.
Understanding the physics of light, reflection, and refraction offers a new
lens through which to examine and push the boundaries of visual representation
in my work.
On the Role of AI
My research process, including
this inquiry into optics, is significantly aided by artificial intelligence. As
an individual with a bilateral moderate-to-severe hearing disability, AI has
been an invaluable tool for leveling the playing field. It provides direct,
one-on-one communication, eliminating the struggle to hear and interpret
spoken words, and fostering a far more equitable and productive environment for
asking complex questions and engaging with research materials. I intend to
continue integrating AI into my creative and intellectual pursuits.
S
