Art or science?
- Thread starter The Stonker
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, I know you said that scientists should stop working.Blue_vision said:"I don't agree with your opinion so I assume that you're uneducated"?zhoominator said:You've obviously never studied a science subject thenBlue_vision said:.
Yes, I've studied science. And while I get a kick out of the insanity of quantum mechanics or the awesome moment when I realized what light actually was, I still far prefer music or a good movie.
Not to mention that science doesn't really have anywhere to go anymore for the average populace. I'm not going to tell scientists that they should stop working (really, they shouldn't! It's awesome stuff that they do for the scientific community and indirectly help arts and influence philosophy,) but aside from the few diseases that we have left, there's not much that technology can do to legitimately improve human lifestyles. More, better arts though? It could do wonders.
But think if a upper class Englishman in the 1900's had said that and look at all the wonders that game.
What is left for the general public? Better houses,faster trasnportation,bio-mechanics (prostetics),cybernetics,saving the third world,global warming and lastly but not least!
Better condoms.
Music is an artform, and since i want to go pro.
I choose art as personal goal. (I play the bass if you might ask)
I choose art as personal goal. (I play the bass if you might ask)
Science is art and art is science, but I will say be are equally important. Science keeps us alive while art gives us a reason to stay alive. Also, science teaches us the world around us, but art teaches us the culture around as and the culture of eras before.
So... you've never seen a film? Art has many forms and need not be restricted. Besides science is just boring next to art. (My personal opinion btw, no offense meant to science followers.) And let us not forget when the two coincide. Art + science = video games. That's kinda why we're all on this website.LifeCharacter said:
I'd prioritize the thing that grants me the opportunity for shelter, preserving food, medical treatment and overall eases my life considerably.
Not that said life wouldn't be empty without art/entertainment. But first things first, scientific advancement is what I owe that my basic needs are met.
Not that said life wouldn't be empty without art/entertainment. But first things first, scientific advancement is what I owe that my basic needs are met.
While I plan to pursue a career in art, I respect and admire science. And besides, when was the last time you saw a dude in lab coat and goggles screaming "AAAAART!!!!!" I mean, outside Boston.
Art looks pretty and is an expression of the culture it is from.
Science allows a person to stick their hand into another persons chest cavity, cut out their heart, put in a new heart, and save a life.
Science wins QED
Science allows a person to stick their hand into another persons chest cavity, cut out their heart, put in a new heart, and save a life.
Science wins QED
In terms of my everyday life (like most peoples I would assume) science plays a larger role and is more important, I do think though on some level it is invisible. What I mean is we take science for granted and aren't fully concious of it (we are aware running water/electricity etc are based in science but aren't constantly dwelling upon it).
Complicit in the consumption of art (largely) is the conciousness of art as art. When we listen to music, watch a film, look at a painting, read literature etc the artisitic nature of the work is not a means to an end. Art is used as art not as a means to an end. To elaborate further electricity turns on the TV to receive the signal to broadcast the show and speaking personally I am aware of the programme and art over technology and science.
I voted for art even though on some level it feels irrational to do so knowing the importance of science in my life.
Complicit in the consumption of art (largely) is the conciousness of art as art. When we listen to music, watch a film, look at a painting, read literature etc the artisitic nature of the work is not a means to an end. Art is used as art not as a means to an end. To elaborate further electricity turns on the TV to receive the signal to broadcast the show and speaking personally I am aware of the programme and art over technology and science.
I voted for art even though on some level it feels irrational to do so knowing the importance of science in my life.
Actually in a lot of ways they are closely related. Just ask Leonardo da Vinci.Verlander said:
Yea, I'm not going to vote either. In my opinion although they serve different purposes on the surface they are mutually dependant. I'm at uni doing computer science and one of the books we need to read is Godel Escher Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. Bach's music, Escher's images, and Godel's maths all mirror each other in really unusual and interesting ways. Also that book is MELTING MY BRAIN.
