>But there are actual reasons that there are divisions between art and science in terms of purpose and method. I would say something with similar ideas much di

>But there are actual reasons that there are divisions between art and science in terms of purpose and method. I would say something with similar ideas much differently. Current scientists and artists suffer from a distinctly large division of purpose and method which simplifies and diminishes both art and science. That is, there's too much of a difference and not enough overlap in both. And there is a vacuum which needs to be filled with things that can't be fit into a neat split between one or the other. Not that things heavy with one kind of purpose and method or the other are wrong, we just need a lot more people who are a lot more competent at both at the same time. People do try and have been talking about it for a long time, unfortunately there is a strong tendency towards rambling nonsense about one side or the other. You do indeed end up with a lot of shitty mysticism. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance influenced me the most on the topic probably because it was my first exposure. If you can recognize and filter out the influence of the author's megalomania, there's quite a lot there.