Wednesday, February 25, 2009

The Science versus Art conundrum (Part 3)

The Solution

To understand water as a whole, we need to know both - its constituents and properties. Trying to separate the scientific from the artistic is the cause of a lot of problems. Religions today "seemingly" have no scientific basis, not because they are not scientific, but because they are followed blindly in the artistic method. People follow the techniques and rituals without knowing its scientific essence.

On the other hand, science and analysis will ever remain incomplete if we cannot adopt a holistic view to look at things. Science cannot explain the basis of intuition and feelings from which arise all major pieces of art. To try to dig deeper further takes the scientists away from the truth. Rather than to pinpoint xyz as the cause of an issue, we need to see that a lot of times there is no direct causal relationship identifiable. Certain events just happen and can be understood on an experiential basis only. That you go digging into why the event occurred after its occurrence will lead you to reasons but to no avail. Events will keep on happening and we will keep analyzing. Sometimes, the flutter of a butterfly in Japan can cause a tornado in the US as per the butterfly effect. There lies no way to predict despite infinite analysis. Science needs a more accepting attitude towards art.

Thus, a more intellectual approach by the followers of art and a more accepting approach by the scientific thinkers can help us bring an equilibrium in the world and a combination of these attitudes can help us solve any problem in a much better manner.

As Guruji puts it, "Kuch jaan ke chalo, kuch maan ke chalo, sabko pyaar se jeetke chalo". [Know somethings and move ahead, believe somethings and move ahead, Win everyone with love and keep moving ahead :)]


sayrem said...

just like everything else in life, there needs to be a synergy, an amalgamation of oppsites. nature, above all, primarily teaches us BALANCE. dat is a lesson sadly forgotten.

Ketan said...

The unfortunate fact is that science has come real close to unraveling the basis of aesthetics. It's unfortunate, not for me, as I would not start finding something less beautiful only because I'd know the reason why I find it beautiful. But it's unfortunate for others who feel that fun behind a phenomenon is lost the moment one knows the bases for it. Just taking a cue from your post about smoking and drinking, many medicos know that their pleasurable effects are because of release of a neurotransmitter called dopamine, but that doesn't make them find it any less attractive.

Also, it'd be bit wrong to say that there's no beauty in science. For instance, isn't it a beautiful fact that two gases--hydrogen and oxygen combine to form water--a liquid at room temperature?

There's beauty in randomness, as well as, in pattern. It's about enjoying both. :)

Also if you ever felt that those interested in science don't have a sense and appreciation for arts, then you'd be wrong! Einstein used to enjoy playing violin. :)