Comments on: Does science need art to answer fundamental questions? http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/ Presenting the fact and fiction of tomorrow since 2001 Sat, 19 May 2012 23:03:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Nancy Jane Moore http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-15236 Nancy Jane Moore Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:40:14 +0000 http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/#comment-15236 Art is crucial to everything, not just science. However, since the understanding gleaned through art isn't linear, it may be tricky to map the process. Then again, a lot of the great minds of science developed their theories based on leaps of inspiration. Those questioning the relationship might want to look at the New Humanities Institute being developed at Binghamton University by biology professor David Sloan Wilson and English professor Leslie Haywood. Natalie Angier writes about it <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/27/science/27angi.html?pagewanted=all" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Art is crucial to everything, not just science. However, since the understanding gleaned through art isn’t linear, it may be tricky to map the process. Then again, a lot of the great minds of science developed their theories based on leaps of inspiration.

Those questioning the relationship might want to look at the New Humanities Institute being developed at Binghamton University by biology professor David Sloan Wilson and English professor Leslie Haywood. Natalie Angier writes about it here.

]]> By: John the Statistician http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-15234 John the Statistician Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:20:42 +0000 http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/#comment-15234 I think that science necessarily relies on culture to say which problems are fundamental in the first place (and what is margin scribbling), and that art's reflection of culture can give cues into what is generally being thought about. I don't think it should be surprising that the era of abstract art and many breakthroughs fundamentals and foundations in physics and logic occurred together, just as generative/data-oriented/situated approaches are having their impact now in both science and art. However, I don't know if there is as often direct inspiration, instead of the engaged scientist or artist continually thinking and observing their surroundings, with little ability to stop except for in the most escapist conditions (like Bohr at the westerns). I think that science necessarily relies on culture to say which problems are fundamental in the first place (and what is margin scribbling), and that art’s reflection of culture can give cues into what is generally being thought about. I don’t think it should be surprising that the era of abstract art and many breakthroughs fundamentals and foundations in physics and logic occurred together, just as generative/data-oriented/situated approaches are having their impact now in both science and art. However, I don’t know if there is as often direct inspiration, instead of the engaged scientist or artist continually thinking and observing their surroundings, with little ability to stop except for in the most escapist conditions (like Bohr at the westerns).

]]> By: Åka http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-15228 Åka Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:07:47 +0000 http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/#comment-15228 It is not impossible that in some special cases art might give the right impulse to thing outside the right corner of the box at hand, but art is not a method to do science. Instead, I think that art (and not only high art, also the popular culture stuff like comics and skiffy movies) is an interpretation of life, a reflection of our world view -- including science. It is not impossible that in some special cases art might give the right impulse to thing outside the right corner of the box at hand, but art is not a method to do science. Instead, I think that art (and not only high art, also the popular culture stuff like comics and skiffy movies) is an interpretation of life, a reflection of our world view — including science.

]]> By: Dave http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-15226 Dave Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:54:09 +0000 http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/#comment-15226 1 for "romantic plea" pls kthx 1 for “romantic plea” pls kthx

]]> By: Tyler http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-15223 Tyler Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:53:05 +0000 http://futurismic.com/2008/06/24/does-science-need-art-to-answer-fundamental-questions/#comment-15223 Jonah Lehrer knows nothing about science if he think that looking at paintings of nude women will bring us any closer to pharmacological nanomachines. Jonah Lehrer knows nothing about science if he think that looking at paintings of nude women will bring us any closer to pharmacological nanomachines.

]]>