IS it possible that those "simple" eyes are not evolutionary proto-eyes, but this other theory I have?

Question

I was thinking that some genes make the eye to the extent of being a light-sensitive patch, and that some genes enhance it to what we have. And that for some reason some species in the world have lost some of the genes or not gotten them in the first place. This is in contrast to the Theory of Evolution that the light-sensitive patches are evolutionary trails of what we all used to be in between our origins and what we now have.

Answer 1

Like all evolutionary structures, it is a pause in the process (why some dispute evolution). It is doubtful, by evolutionary standards that an organism ever had more than a light sensitive patch and then regressed. If evolutionary theory is true, this creature simply never evolved enough to support an eye which could sense more than light. If it is not true it could have regressed to a photo (light) sensitive eye, though in paleontological  and  evolutionary circles it is unheard of.