It was Aristotle who first divided up the subject areas and our modern universities tend to protect those boundaries that he created. Most universities will have distinct faculties of arts and sciences, for instance. But the division clearly has some artificiality. Suppose one assumed, for example, that the arts were about creativity while the sciences were about a rigorous application of technique and methods. This would be an oversimplification because all disciplines need both.
Art has the potential to transform society and bring about revolutionary change. Art can be an invitation, a wake- up call, a criticism of the world and also engage society. Some people may think that science and art are polar opposites and have no connection but I think that both studies are ripe with the potential for amazing collaboration. Science helps you know things; art can reach your feelings and tug on your soul. As humans we are many times led by our feelings. Art can make things like data or abstract numbers found in science more appealing and relatable by presenting it in a visually understandable way.
Darwin drew sketches of the various finches during his explorations in the Galapagos Islands, scientists use photography to document findings and the various steps in their experimental process. Science can be enhanced by the aesthetic value that art provides. Science also requires creative thinking in order to see a problem, think of a hypothesis and then find a way to test that hypothesis out.
All of that requires creative thinking which is also called innovation. People may be more interested in a science by the visual appeal. Art can take an ob-servant and informant lens making it similar to science.Society has put much more value these days on science in terms of financial gain and job security. But I think both provide various avenues of expression and success.
Leave a Reply