My thoughts exactly!Nimcha said:Personally I see science as an art.
Other than this, though, it's really a vote of Practicality or Personality.
Art or science?
- Thread starter The Stonker
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Other than this, though, it's really a vote of Practicality or Personality.
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.Island said:
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.
I would just like to say that, aside from some people who would rather turn this detbate into an argument on the validity of terms, it's showgin quite a brighter side of this forum's posters.
That's really great.
False dichotomies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma] are very damaging to intelligent conversations, as it stimulates people to think precisely in limited binary terms.
People, arts and sciences are by-products of the human experience, don't ever forget it. They matter because they've meant a great deal to us for countless generations. There's no real separation.
As well-intentioned as it might be, the argument this topic generates is flawed.
That's really great.
Because some people like to think about the world of "this vs that", whici is much easier than to see how the brightes artistas and scientists actually imagine it, as a universe fill with most diverse colors, sounds and ultimately vibrations.MaxwellEdison said:
False dichotomies [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma] are very damaging to intelligent conversations, as it stimulates people to think precisely in limited binary terms.
People, arts and sciences are by-products of the human experience, don't ever forget it. They matter because they've meant a great deal to us for countless generations. There's no real separation.
As well-intentioned as it might be, the argument this topic generates is flawed.
I see your point now, but believe you missed the point of this thread. This thread isn't asking which discipline you'd erase from our culture, this is about which one you'd follow personally and which one is more important.iLikeHippos said:
Also, I'm not sure you mean politically correct. This is a societal question, not a political one (most politicians seem to get by with only the vaguest idea of scientific concepts).
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.Island said:
Art and science are completely different things. Science is about increasing the body of knowledge of society. Art, to me, is more like a reflection of the subconscious mind (or at least the kind of art I like). Science builds towards a brighter future, while art is just an interesting hobby. I chose science.
While art is important for enjoyment, etc, science is a fundamentally important aspect of society. Without the technology that was created using science, nothing would separate us from other animals.
While art is important for enjoyment, etc, science is a fundamentally important aspect of society. Without the technology that was created using science, nothing would separate us from other animals.
ANTHROPOLOGY IS THE SCIENCE OF ART
That is, if you take the definition of art to mean "something that describes the human condition". Anthropology tries to explain, scientifically, what it means to be human.
ANTHROPOLOGY MAJORS PICK BOTH!
That is, if you take the definition of art to mean "something that describes the human condition". Anthropology tries to explain, scientifically, what it means to be human.
ANTHROPOLOGY MAJORS PICK BOTH!
Island said:
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.
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.
Neither, I say Magic!!!
Ok I voted for Science since although I'm a art guy myself but without science we would all be living in the dark ages or still believe in witches etc. Ok granted we will live in a logical world were everyone is have no creative mind what so ever (that would be hell foe me).
Ok I voted for Science since although I'm a art guy myself but without science we would all be living in the dark ages or still believe in witches etc. Ok granted we will live in a logical world were everyone is have no creative mind what so ever (that would be hell foe me).
I am personally more interested in pursuing art, though that doesn't really have anything to do with one being better than the other.
I would choose art since I am of the opinion that the development of artistry and aesthetics in our species led to greater intellect and abstract thinking which in turn led to philosophy and science.
I would choose art since I am of the opinion that the development of artistry and aesthetics in our species led to greater intellect and abstract thinking which in turn led to philosophy and science.
There is no science without art. Look at Da Vinci, Archimedes, the foundation of science lies in the arts.
Watch Art: 21. There's a guy who uses pyrotechnics and explosions to create some of the coolest art I've ever seen!LifeCharacter said:
OT: Art and Science are one and the same. I suggest reading the book "Sophie's World," and a second look at the work of Leonardo DaVinci.
A quick look at the state of cinematography over the past few decades might change some minds as well.... though I suppose that depends on what one includes under the heading of art.Samwise137 said: