So, in honor of Freshly Pressed (for featuring my 99th blog / 99th day of this experiment this weekend) I took a more purposeful spin through the freshly pressed features and found one blogger whose point of view on art and science I found pretty interesting:
This blog is not actually about either the topics of science or art, but rather on the language of each…and why different human disciplines which both seek understanding as a common goal approach the accessibility of that understanding in different ways. Science: left brain. Art: right brain. Science: technical. Art: emotional.
As an anthropologist, linguistics is a central focus that lends to the “decoding” of human culture. I posted this in response to the contents of the blog:
“Interesting dialogue. As a social scientist, I find it an imperative to find the balance between science and art and make understanding as accessible as possible. Partly because I do it as a professional practice for enhancing consumer culture…but the other driver is as a human studying humans and wanting us all to share the meaning that is out there.
That is definitely more difficult to do with “hard sciences” because I think the grand design was to make that understanding only accessible to those who could influence change in the right way? Probably because the left brain aptitudes that contribute to scientific achievement also contribute to broader scale disorders, neuroses and other dysfunction that lead the darker side of human nature. I’ve never seen a megalomaniac artist (or anthropologist, for that matter…just slightly narcissistic ones. )…but the mad scientist is definitely someone you don’t want to miss with.”
But my point is this: how often do we get blinded by “art”? And I don’t think I have ever seen anyone confused by “ethnography” – which basically tells the story of a culture in order to drive empathy / remove ethnocentrism from our understanding of other cultures. So what is it about the language of hard science that is so intentionally inaccessible? Why is it necessary that this level of understanding of our human existence not be so easily shared?
Are they blinding us with science? Or are “they” simply protecting us from ourselves?
- Can We Quit It With the “Right Brain, Left Brain” Stuff Already?! (bigthink.com)
- Magic and Science from From the Sorcerer’s Skull (sorcerersskull.blogspot.com)
- An Anthropologist In Context (thebrandsherpa.wordpress.com)
- Why The Left-Brain Right-Brain Myth Will Probably Never Die [Debunkery] (io9.com)
- Social Science is Hard (motherjones.com)
- What’s Soft about Social Science? (everydaysociologyblog.com)
- A Sci Am essay (made out of an essay writing service): Are humanities scientific? (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com)
- Science and Art from 1912: A Look Back in Scientific American ‘s Archives [Slide Show] (scientificamerican.com)
- Science & Faith: Friends or Foes? (defendingcontending.com)
6 thoughts on “Who Wants To Be Blinded With Science?”
Thanks for the link and your really interesting comment! I’ll be coming back to check on your blog and see what I can learn here!
Really enjoyed your post. I love finding inspiration from other bloggers…a habit I am learning to get in to….
Try reading this blog freshly pressed too http://anatomyofstory.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/science-and-art/
I don’t think there is an attempt to blind anyone really, just that science often demands a fairly focused understanding , and use language speciifc to its particular field. Art can be inacessible to a fault. For myself, I love to dabble in both ponds, but only ever ankle deep. The difficulty this generation have is the specificity of knowledge. There is now so much to understand, that is very hard to be a polymath, and the only possible progression to new knowledge is via collaboration. I don’t like working in a team, since I am introverted to a fault. That means I am only ever going to be looking over others shoulders !
This is actually the blog I am referring / linking to. 😉
Whoops!! my sincere apologies for overlooking that bit!!!
I think art and science actually come from the same place, but they themselves are different expressions of it. Or so I’ve heard. So I do believe that one can inform the other.