Tbf didn't lighting suck then? Surely "dimly lit" was just their default? It's not just that they couldn't see in that lighting, but maybe they couldn't envision a world in which you could see with clarity, and so their mind never even went to the possibility of manoeuvres obscured by lack of vision.
I think a modern equivalent (maybe slightly too literal) would be if future generations had hyper-fluorescent lighting that illuminated every single speck and shadow beyond modern capabilities. There are lots of magic / party tricks we're still vaguely fooled by today that wouldn't be able to withstand that scrutiny. They wouldn't impress a 5 year old from the future even if the lights were turned off etc – the 5 year old would have the ability to envision simple visual possibilities in their mind that us adults today can't
Positive_Try_5699 t1_j9q3pv2 wrote
Reply to comment by TheCloudFestival in TIL that in 1554 Elizabeth Crofts hid in a wall on Aldersgate Street, where she pretended to be a heavenly voice. Reputedly 17,000 people came to listen to her give out anti-Catholic propaganda. by Kurma-the-Turtle
Tbf didn't lighting suck then? Surely "dimly lit" was just their default? It's not just that they couldn't see in that lighting, but maybe they couldn't envision a world in which you could see with clarity, and so their mind never even went to the possibility of manoeuvres obscured by lack of vision.
I think a modern equivalent (maybe slightly too literal) would be if future generations had hyper-fluorescent lighting that illuminated every single speck and shadow beyond modern capabilities. There are lots of magic / party tricks we're still vaguely fooled by today that wouldn't be able to withstand that scrutiny. They wouldn't impress a 5 year old from the future even if the lights were turned off etc – the 5 year old would have the ability to envision simple visual possibilities in their mind that us adults today can't