A purely instrumental mode of seeing prevents genuine encounter with the world

Evidence

In his 1923 book I and Thou, the philosopher Martin Buber draws a distinction between what he calls I-It and I-Thou ways of seeing. In I-It, the other (a thing or a person) is an “it” that exists only as an instrument or means to an end, something to be appropriated by the “I.” A person who only knows I-It will never encounter anything outside himself because he does not truly “encounter.” Buber writes that such a person “only knows the feverish world out there and his feverish desire to use it…When he says You, he means: You, my ability to use!” — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing, 375

Categorization

• XREF: I-It vs I-Thou directly grounds Odell’s distinction between attention-as-instrument and attention-as-recognition; connects to the reader’s interest in defending against the ‘withdrawal’ misreading. — connects to: Hiding motionlessly within a landscape yields encounters impossible to any active approach — Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac: With Other…, 567; Wonder at the spectacular can block understanding of everyday harmony — Freeman Tilden, Interpreting Our Heritage, 672; Instrumental observation fragments objects into measurable parts; contemplation surrenders to the whole image. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 218