If I've understood:
- Interference/diffraction explained by the wave theory of light. Reflection/refraction explained by dielectric susceptibility (that is, the charges in the media can be driven by the EM wave, to some degree).
- Dispersion (the fact that prisms produce rainbows) requires that the dielectric susceptibility depends on the driving frequency.
- the fact that a media can sometimes absorb light (not only reflect/transmit) can be expressed by further writing the dielectric susceptibility as complex. The real part mostly* determines the refractive index and the imaginary part mostly* determines the rate of (exponential) attenuation. (* these parts can only be disentangled this easily if the media is weakly absorbing, e.g. translucent.)
- Using basic QM we can calculate the energy levels of the (simple) atom (and predict which few specific frequencies of light it will absorb).
- Using quantum perturbation theory ("Fermi's golden rule"), we can determine the rate at which some driving EM wave will (or will not) cause atoms to be excited (which we interpret as absorption of a quantum of energy from that EM wave).
- From this we deduce (an approximation to) the imaginary part of the dielectric susceptibility (which, with respect to frequency, will look like a discrete series of very isolated but Doppler-broadened peaks).
- Due to the differential equations of classical dynamics conveniently satisfying certain conditions (like causality), we can use the KK-relation to determine (an approximation to) the real part of the dielectric susceptibility (and therefore also the refractive index, etc, for all wavelengths) directly from just the (approximate) imaginary part.
Did I miss anything? (For one thing, it seems this line of argument would make certain predictions, like that the refractive index will change in a specific/trivial way as the density of a gas changes. Has this all confirmed by experiment?)