Science or art?

Post Reply New Topic

Doesn't both science and art define a civilisation and its development. It is ok to say that technological progress from lets say the horse and cart to cars is a sign of civilisation becoming more advanced but arts also becoming more sophisticated in some areas except for popular music. I would have previously thought science as more useful because the 'usefulness' of the sciences is aparent and that art is more for asthetics or for the enjoyment of psychedelic drugs as espoused by the countercultures of the 1960s and the late 1980s early 1990s in the forms of the hippie movement and House and rave culture which feed on developing values and have been an influence on art. The drugs used by these two countercultures have been developed by science (organic chemistry). Even during the Renaissance which was an acceleration of artistic and scientific process that began during the late 14th century Italy as a mixing of Ideas from the Latin Christian Europe and the Islamic world and a blending of scientifc and artistic ideas from both civilisations. One comes to a conclusion that both fertilise the development of the human species as a whole and so therefore science and art are of equal importance except for the latter it is not obvious at first.

Do you guys really think that art and science go together? In the school curriculum, they still use the term "stem". while other say it should be called "steam" with the "a" standing for art.

They both rely heavily on observation, my favorite thing to do, so I like both.

Self enjoys both for different reasons. I will still answer poll.

Math

I like Information Technology.

To break the word down into it's original pieces:
Techna is an ancient greek word meaning "Art" and "Craft" and Logy is a form of Logos which now means "Study of"

So, I guess I would consider it an art.

I don't see the point in this dichotomy. I chose the art option because I study an art course, but in all honesty I don't see why the two need to be oppositional to one another. Art and science can serve one another, but they also have nothing to do with each other.

I enjoy art for mostly selfish reasons. I like to draw and I'm good at it, so I might as well make a living from it. I also love animation and I love that I can basically create life, even if it is only there for a few seconds. When i watch animated films, I don't just see the finished product - i see the many many hands that have touched each carefully crafted frame and all the blood, sweat and tears that goes into mere milliseconds. That kind of craft and dedication is something I live for, even if other people only see what I do is doodles. Art is playful and experimental in its own way and I feel it is important for us as a society to indulge in artistic pursuits. Art is a venue where we can explore different ideas about the human condition, about society, about our culture and it's also a very social thing. I haven't met one person (yet) who hasn't been moved by a book or a movie or even a painting. I have also never met a scientist who would scoff at artistic endeavors.

I have, unfortunately, met artists who have this weird aversion to science. They probably had a bad science teacher at school and that's why they ended up denouncing anything within that bracket as boring and "too technical", but when you actually know scientists you find out that they are more like excited kids, not boring and stuffy. These are people that are passionate about learning about how stuff works, the nature of the planet, the nature of humans, etc and they want to use their knowledge for the betterment of the world. In a way, there's a beauty in that worldview that no piece of art can truly capture.

It also frustrates me because all artists working today have scientists to thank for the medium we have chosen. Without synthetic pigments, we would never so easily obtain the colour blue. Without the invention of photography, we wouldn't have film. Without computers, we wouldn't have things like drawing tablets. We owe a lot to these nerds, guys - show some damn respect.

I might be a scientific layman, but I ain't gonna bash it.

I'm not into art at all but I'm not really into science either thou I do like some syfy shows so my vote was for science.

Science and art seem to be able to fertilize each other.
Science needs the intuitive element as well as the logical one and vice versa.
Many a scientist has also been artists and not too few artists have been engaged in science.
The original scientific thinker draws on the same sources as the artist.
I almost think, that science and art could not exist without each other.