Art or science?

[Jedoro]

Mythbusters has shown just how beautiful science can be, and art rarely has explosions.

QFT

Art isn't as fun.

so video games, comic books, movies, novels, and this website are not as fun?

Video games take the science of computers to create, don't read comic books, movies take good science for CG and special effects, novels take science to print, and this website uses science to run.

To simplify my point, assuming I had the supply, ask me whether I'd rather spend an hour on the Escapist or an hour throwing frag grenades in the woods. I'd be out there in a heartbeat, science is just more fun.

there was no such thing as what we call science when explosives were first created, and even if you want to call that prescience creation primitive science throwing frag grenades in the woods is NOT science.

It may not have been called that, but that's what it is; I'm pretty sure chemistry is part of science. Frag grenades are just applied science. I also don't see how typing on a website can be called art, since it's the English language combined with computer science.

you throwing frag grenades in the woods is not applied science or any other kind of science. i guess if you just like to call it that for fun that's fine, but its not and telling people that it is may make them wonder it you should have access to grenades. as far as typing on a website being called art i am unsure as to what your talking about.

Applied science is the application of scientific knowledge transferred into a physical environment.

Yes, it is applied science: the scientific knowledge of a handheld explosive transferred into a physical environment of a forest.

Ever heard of the show Mythbusters? They pretty much play with dangerous things and call it science. Maybe I'd like to see how many grenades it takes to take down trees of a certain diameter? Doesn't matter, since they're illegal for civilian ownership, but you'd only need to worry if I talked about their use in a mall.

so video games, comic books, movies, novels, and this website are not as fun?

You seem to have forgotten your first reply to me. In this statement, when I said art isn't as fun, you mentioned these, so it can be said you're implying these are art. Someone should remember what they say, or at least scroll up if they forget.

i guess we could keep arguing about what is and is not science, but i don't think we will get anywhere. as far as what i had said in my first statement i didn't mean that just typing on a website would be considered art. what i meant was that there was an artist that designed the aesthetics or layout of the website.

Ah, my misunderstanding then. I gotta admit, since the grenade thing is out, I'd prefer to go to a shooting range, but renting guns gets costly so I'm waiting until I buy my own.

 

[Sewblon]

art rarely has explosions.

Unless you count movies as art.

 

[Abengoshis]

But if we didn't develop our scientific knowledge, we wouldn't have the tools or substances to create more varied art!

 

[guntotingtomcat]

Oh, come on. One's recreational and one's a job.

(I would argue that art critics look at art in a scientific way)

They're not diametrically opposed. Why can't I have both!?

 

[HonorableChairman]

We, as society, cannot exist without either. It's like asking whether I would rather have my heart than my brain. They work together. You could make the argument that there is no art without science, and vice-versa.

 

[oblivionenigma]

Assuming pure science, which is pure objectivity/observation and no subjectivity (this is the only way they could be mutually exclusive):
Science allows one to live.
Art makes life worth living.

So... A long healthy, boring life with no entertainment and no introspection; or a short, disease-ridden painful life with tons of entertainment, soul-searching etc. Either sounds like a horrible existence and not a suitable choice. I choose "other" and say we cannot have an either/or scenario.

 

[rubinigosa]

Fractal art because its art based on mathematics.Well thats the one of things that I know of that have science and art at the same time.

 

[Lazzi]

I have to say the science is more important than art. Yes Im aware that art is importatn and all but stary night is going to help you survive in the wild.

And I dont been to be rude but, realisticly any one can be an artist. all you need to do its create something and have other people around that like it.

However the important thing is that creativity is more important, cultural and scientific knowledge are nice put pointless if you dont know how to manipulat them.

 

[Redingold]

if your asking which is more essential to humanity it is without a doubt art. there is no other human activity more innate, before there was language there was art. if we where to loose the artist part of our being we would cease to be human, and all progress would come to a standstill because without creativity there can be no progress. people take artists for granted, but who do you think designed the buildings that you live in, the clothes that you wear the VIDEO GAMES you play, the comic books you read, the movies you watch, the music you listen to, and the list
could go on and on. the things i listed are really just the little things we are surronded by art all day everyday we designed your cities most everything any of you own an artist had a hand in making. without art and artist the world would be shit.

And who invented the computer, the phonograph, the movie camera, the mobile phone and the Internet? A building might not look brilliant without artists, but it wouldn't be there without architects, and the physicists who discovered the laws of mechanics.

 

[AndrewF022]

Two sides of the same coin, we probably wouldn't be where we are today without both.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

Personally I see science as an art.

Science from pure definition can not be art, science is a search for answers, art is the expression of questions

 

[The Rockerfly]

As a man who listens, writes and performs music, draws when ever I can and in my spare time uses my creative brain on whatever game will allow him (minecraft is a good example) I say
Science

Art is beautiful, magical, mesmerising and spectacular. It can make you happier than anything that could be said, people to fall in love and bring a grown man weeping in tears. But it can also bring hatred, the worst out of mankind and can cause wars to start. It's opinionated and will never truly progress, it is locked in a ball of art where there are limits to how it evolves either through social, technological or technical reasons

Science has no ego, is constantly evolving and there is no limit. There will never be a limit in science and it will never do bad or good but constantly neutral, giving the information to bring out developments in war and in medicine.

At least my thoughts on it

 

[Kaymish]

well i would say science i have seen so many people i know take art degrees and courses and they invariably wind up as drug addicts or just in a dead end with no chance of work unless you are very very good art is a path to no where
where as on the other hand i have seen people myself included take degrees in science who never did very well and now they do pretty good there is always room for more science and the contributions it brings
better to do science as your career and art as your hobby

 

[kinapuffar]

Voted other.
It's apples and oranges. Without science, we wouldn't have a fraction of our modern comforts, including all modern instruments.
But without art life wouldn't be worth living.

They're both important.

 

[monkey_man]

We need more science. How are we going to conquer the universe without spacecruising battleships? or orbital lasers?
C'mon people! enlist Science today!

 

[Unspeakable]

Without Science, we would not have video games.
Without Art, we would not have anime.
Gee, there's a no-brainer.

 

[kinapuffar]

Without Science, we would not have video games.
Without Art, we would not have anime.
Gee, there's a no-brainer.

Without art we wouldn't have video games either.