http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/ the art of biology & the biology of art Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:53:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-25052 Sunil Gangadharan Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:45:28 +0000 http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-25052 Cicada, Good post. The art science dichotomy began recently. Three hundred years ago, there was no difference. Art was the creative candle that sustained science during its infancy. Now, though it is a different matter... The necessary specialization that took place in the sciences did not percolate down to the arts resulting in a dichotomy (that might be percieved), deep down a lot of scientists are artists (not too sure about the vice versa). Liked this read - metaphors and all... Sunil Cicada,
Good post. The art science dichotomy began recently. Three hundred years ago, there was no difference. Art was the creative candle that sustained science during its infancy. Now, though it is a different matter… The necessary specialization that took place in the sciences did not percolate down to the arts resulting in a dichotomy (that might be percieved), deep down a lot of scientists are artists (not too sure about the vice versa). Liked this read – metaphors and all…
Sunil

]]> http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-24748 Hungry Hyaena Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:29:14 +0000 http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-24748 &@%$#* great, Cicada. Thanks. I plan to forward this to all the "artsy-sciencesy" hybrids I know...and maybe some others. &@%$#* great, Cicada. Thanks. I plan to forward this to all the “artsy-sciencesy” hybrids I know…and maybe some others.

]]> http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-24732 mdvlist Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:25:19 +0000 http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/28/seeding-art-in-science-and-vice-versa/#comment-24732 What an interesting post. I suppose I'm not surprised that somebody would indulge in that sort of hyperbolic assertion of art's importance to science. Scholarship in the humanities certainly teaches us that we're more likely to get published AND get attention if we push a sensible argument (doubtless published already) into the realm of absurdity. I wonder what artistic credentials the writer has? I notice that academics in the fine arts are the very worst about wildly inflating the value (and utility) of art-- as if it weren't degrading to art to be treated as though no reasonable argument could be made for its worth. What an interesting post. I suppose I’m not surprised that somebody would indulge in that sort of hyperbolic assertion of art’s importance to science. Scholarship in the humanities certainly teaches us that we’re more likely to get published AND get attention if we push a sensible argument (doubtless published already) into the realm of absurdity. I wonder what artistic credentials the writer has? I notice that academics in the fine arts are the very worst about wildly inflating the value (and utility) of art– as if it weren’t degrading to art to be treated as though no reasonable argument could be made for its worth.

]]>