Arts and Sciences

The whole idea seems cliche actually.

We have been probably talked about this for years now, especially whether a particular thing is an art or a science. This post is a different take on the argument.

We always consider these two as two separate concepts. What I believe is that these two are stages of an evolution. Think of them as first floor and second floor. Science is the first floor, and arts is the second.

Why do I say so?
The idea is based on a lot of thoughts related to activities we consider analytical, and therefore scientific, and other activities which we consider creative, and therefore artisitic. For almost every field of man's efforts, things start with taking more and more information and organising all of it.

Let us take the example of a science considered as one of the purest of sciences - physics.

The quest to the physics knowledge bank that we have today started out with the inventions of the natural numbers, and then moved to whole numbers, rational and then real numbers. Of course, on the way, we invented equations, mathematical operations. We also created all theories of phenomena that we considered natural and factual in the world around us - geometry, gravity, repulsion, e=mc2, et al.

But then, we got stuck at finding out the square root of -1. Here, the analytical brain stopped, but the creative brain took off... and created an imaginary number i. It led to more discoveries and inventions.

What's more, it is in the field of physics (the pure science) that we have probably the most number of creative theories. The Big Bang Theory, sub-atomic particles, multiple Universes, string theory, the list goes on. Most of them have their own set of believers and critics. But none of them can conclusively prove or disprove their own convictions. Talk of purity of science!


Let's look at the arts field. How does one start off in painting or photography? By understanding the science of colour combinations and brush strokes. And by understanding the impact of lighting and perspective on the final photograph.

What are the first things taught to dancers? Understanding their body movements and the science of beats.

What is the first thing taught to musicians? The science of the sargam (Sa Re Ga Ma or octaves).

It is from this basic understanding of science that becomes the launchpad for take off in the unexplored and unexpressed forms of colours, images, dances and sounds. Take any good piece of art, and chances are that the fundamentals of that work would be in place too.

If science and art were indeed opposites, what would you call this post - an article on science because it's rational, or a piece of art because it's a unique point of view on things around us?