The relation between Art and Science. Would it be possible for a society without Art to have Science? Absolutely not! (3rd Panhellenic Conference of Fine Artists, 1995)

1. In the Process of Cognition
a. Art expresses and cultivates the ability of Man to think in Images.
This intellectual ability is called Imagination.
Imagination (in Humankind) is the synthesizing function of the intellect that transforms the blending of the data of experience, intuition and knowledge into a Holistic mental image.
b. In the process of understanding the partial (analysis), Science must be able to maintain the Image of the Whole in which the parts are integrated.
This ability is afforded by Imagination.
c. The development of the Scientific Knowledge expands the horizon of experience and enhances the intuitive function.
These compel Imagination (and Art) to change the way it "looks" at the world.
The new "insight" reveals potential paths towards deeper scientific understanding.
2. In Technology
   Technology reflects the way Man affects the material world surrounding him as well as the degree of his understanding of it.
   The material (and the way it is processed) is the body of Art. The spirit of Art is expressed through the material.
   By using the advances of Technology today, whatever they may be, Art does NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN DOING.
   The prevailing view according to which Technology in nowadays building ties with Art that did not previously exist, lays too much emphasis on the Form of Art, cancels its content, and with it its function in the process of Cognition.
    As a result of this view, no systematic work has been carried out on the aspect of the theory of knowledge, which forms the point of departure and foundation of the Causal relation between Art and Science, despite all possibilities afforded by Technology for such work today.
3. Today, it is more than necessary for Art to acquire a solid basis in science (in view of the new conditions), in order to get rid of the wretchedness of Fashion and the Seemingly New.
   All that has been given in the form of cohesive insight into the History of Art or a Theory of Aesthetics, was given by Philosophy up to the time of Hegel.
   Any subsequent endeavours by inspired movements of redefinition, in the light of the new scientific and social developments, did not have enough time to progress, encumbered as they were by the disastrous events of our century.
   After the Second World War, and particularly in the past two decades, ideological breakdown in Art has taken ominous proportions.
4. By way of indication, I will cite the views of three scientists with respect to Science:
"The role of Aesthetics as s means of successful investigation has not been sufficiently discussed"
Roger Penrose
"The aesthetic orientation is found not only in Man but also in Nature. In fact, it is beauty and not provability that constitutes a criterion of truth in Nature. When your information tells you one thing and your
instinct of the Beautiful tells you another, then leave the former and follow the later."
Nobelist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
"Art is a theory about how people look at the world. It is obvious that no-one has a detailed knowledge of the world that surrounds us. What artists have achieved is to have realized that only few things matter and then they try to find them out. Thus, they can carry out part of my own research for me."
Mitchell Feigenbaum
"Mathematical structure, namely arithmetic analogy as the source of the harmony of sounds, is among the most amazing discoveries of humankind."
Werner Heisenberg
5. A serious approach to the question of the relation between Art and Science cannot avoid the theoretical and experimental investigation of the following questions with the help of the new technological possibilities:
a. Does Art (Painting, Sculpture, Poetry, Music, etc.) contain Logic?
            If so, is it the same logic in all the semblances of Art?
            If so, what are its various manifestations?
            If not, do they converge?
            If so, where and how?
b. Is the Logic of Mathematics the same as the Logic of Natural Science and Nature?
            If so, what are its various manifestations?
            If not, do they converge?
            If so, where and how?
c. Is the Logic of Art, Mathematics, Natural Science and Nature one and the same?
            If so, what are its various manifestations?
            If not, do they converge?
            If so, where and how?
   It is obvious that, in order to deal with the question of the relation between Art and Science, one has to answer in the affirmative the question "Is it possible to provide a satisfactory (scientifically grounded) answer to the questions above?".
Michalis Papadakis
Athens, 3/3/1995

Mihalis Papadakis














Designed by Design-It