Although seeing is often described as unquestionable and the most reliable way for human beings to objectively perceive information about the world around them, it is actually even more complicated and meaningful. In reality, as Amira Mittermaier argues, “We are socialized to pay attention to certain things and not others, to see in certain ways and not in others.”(Mittermaier 86). Thus, vision is not simply independent body function of every human being. Besides that, vision consists of a whole complex of ideas and certain rules set by social and political environment of the human being. 

Mittermaier also discusses the history of seeing. She contends that the modern view on vision derived from numerous historical transformations. Starting with ancient Greek vision theories, the number of ways of understanding seeing has been developed by different philosophers. As a result, Mittermaier concludes that, “The eye, now conceptualized as the most reliable sense organ, came to play a central role in modernity, which accordingly is sometimes labeled ocularcentric.”(Mittermaier 87). Thus, modern culture is ocularcentric with the biggest emphasis put on vision. 

In this context Wodiczko’s Dis-Armor conforms to the accepted ocularcentric modernity, at the same time pointing out this modernity. It makes the viewer of Dis-Armor consciously aware of seemingly subtle influence society has on shaping one’s vision. By placing the eyes on user’s back he challenges this traditional set vision. Wodiczko encourages the viewer to be open to different kind of vision, to see beyond what is one used to seeing.  While interacting with the Dis-Armor user the observer has to suspend his or her disbelief of Dis-Armor being a machine in order to experience face to face communication.