Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication
I have read 'several' articles recently that say, " sciences should embrace art to get more creative and do out of the box thinking".
Well, this really stumps me. Are people of science dumb? All these inventions, discoveries, thinking in new ways to understand the world and help it - observed for so many years came out of nothing? Isn't there creativity in science? Are scientists limited to their narrow boxes ( some are trying to call them pigeon holes!)? Somehow I don't like this belittling science and scientists to promote art.
Some people of art told me because of the character of super speciality, scientists can obtain only narrow views. They fail to see and do things differently. This made me think deeply. Because of my specialization in a particular subject has my world became suddenly narrower? Have I forgotten how to think and do things in a smarter way?
The answer I got was a big "NO"!
In fact my science specialization made me become more creative connecting science, art and literature and doing things more creatively in science. Don't forget that before becoming a specialist, I was a non-specialist and I came to this level after studying several things and subjects. I became a specialist by passing through non-specialization! When a brain is expanded to a certain level, it can never become narrower again!
Moreover, it has been observed that people belonging to different science subjects and regions, when brought together and made to work in collaborations, yielded fantastic results. Scientists give CERN's achievements as a good example of this.
An art-science organization's ad starts with these words: 'The new economy needs scientific and creative minds to come together, understand each other and work together across sector boundaries'.
Aren't scientific minds not creative?! Science subject is based on creativity - more specifically scientific creativity. Without obtaining knowledge in various ways, seeing things differently, finding alternate solutions when encountered with problems, how can science progress?
I agree, art is important for the growth of people's personalities. It is important to make things easy for common people to understand complexity. But to say 'science lacks creativity' and say things that mean 'scientists are dumb' or 'their visions become narrow because of their specializations' is not appropriate to promote arts. How can art and artists come to this level of denigration? Do you have to suppress something so important in human welfare to promote your own subject? People of art think about this before giving another lecture or writing article.