At one of many topics at ScienceOnline'09 later this week, we'll be discussing the relationship of art and science.
In my last post here about this topic, blogger Eva Amsen of Expression Patterns brought up an interesting point about the possibility of diverging technical complexity in both art and science. After thinking about this lucid point for a while, I've added it to the page on the conference wiki, and added some of my own thoughts. I've left my opinions out - for now!
Here is the question from the wiki:
The local apothecary was once a place to purchase medicinal ingredients as well as painter’s pigments, (and both share the same patron Saint as a result, Saint Luke the Apostle). In the Renaissance, the techniques of medicine and science and the techniques of artists were increasing in complexity.
Today, it can be suggested that fine art has largely decreased in technical complexity, while science and medicine continue to specialize and gain complexity. Nowadays, fine art can include whole animals in formaldehyde or casts of packaging, whereas in science and technology, we can manipulate cells or visualize planets orbiting another star.
Is the modern divide in technical complexity real?
If so, is it primarily responsible for the common notion of art and science as “two cultures”?
All original artwork on The Flying Trilobite Copyright to Glendon Mellow. The contents of this blog are under a Creative Commons Licence. See sidebar for details.
Please visit my blog, gallery and reproduction store. 2009 Calendar available for a limited time!