Have you ever wondered what would happen if we don't have light? Not the lightbulbs kinda that you just press the switch and it turns on, but pure, simple, elegant light. From the sun or from alternative sources, it's become an important part of our life, doesn't it? In fact, it would be rather easy to come out with a list of events or actions that we do everyday that depend heavily on light, yet do you know, without light, we would have no darkness?
According to the dictionary, darkness is defined as 'devoid of light', that's to say, any place that has no light, darkness exists. Of course, this would contradict my earlier statement of 'no light, no darkness'.
Yet, note the definitions of darkness. No where can you find a definition of light as devoid of darkness. Science might define it as a electromagnetic wave or radiation that is visible to the human eye or something that makes vision possible. But, you can't find 'lack of darkness'.
At one glance, it wouldn't seem much fodder for thought. But, think further.
Why do we call darkness devoid of light and not the other way round? Could it be darkness might be a subset of light or in layman terms, light's the Prime Minister and darkness is the Deputy Prime Minister, so when the Prime Minister (light) is not around, the Deputy Prime Minister (darkness) takes over?
So then, light comes first, then darkness. so, what about shadows?
Defined as absence of light on a form, or comparative darkness, it could be safe to say shadows consist of darkness, that is to say, the volume of a shadow contains no light.
But, then you start to think, if there's no light in a shadow, how can you even see the shadow because our human eye can only discern light and not darkness.
So there an irony formeths from the ground. Light enables us to see shadows, that which does not contain light, and therefore should not be allowed to be seen, since we can't see that which has no light.
