4 ms·
I think you bring up interesting points, but in Neri Oxman’s case the answer seems to be that the science is essentially absent in its entirety. I won’t pretend
by HBlix 8y ago
I think you bring up interesting points, but in Neri Oxman’s case the answer seems to be that the science is essentially absent in its entirety. I won’t pretend to have a good answer to “what is art,” but the question “what is science” is much easier to answer. Her work may be art, but it utterly fails the test of science insofar as it doesn’t adhere to the scientific method. She’s a scientist in the same way that a color therapist is a medical doctor.
Better examples of the intersection of science and art might be found in the work of someone like Buckminster Fuller. The nature of science being what it is, the science probably has to come first, with the art emerging from it
- diydsp 8y agothis is overly constraining the meaning of science to the process of deduction. science includes observation and exploration.
- HBlix 8y agoObservation and exploration are part of science, but only when mated with the rest of the scientific method. On its own “observation and exploration” can be equally applied to playing in beach sand. If you’re not forming and testing hypotheses, analyzing data from experiment, and attempting to replicate results, you’re not engaged in science. You can’t pick one or two elements of the scientific method and call it science, anymore than you can claim that buying running shoes and standing at the start of a marathon is racing.
- nhf 8y agoIt's still an interesting problem of division. Let's say the end result (bees in space!) is not science. However, in the process of getting those bees to space, her lab invents a novel 3D printing method [1]. Science in service of art? [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17452759.2012.731369 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17452759.2012.73...
- diydsp 8y ago"Although some scientific research is applied research into specific problems, a great deal of our understanding comes from the curiosity-driven undertaking of basic research." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
- rhcom2 8y ago> The nature of science being what it is, the science probably has to come first, with the art emerging from it Most of science fiction kinda disputes this though. A scientist has to have the imagination to construct the experiment.