Personal comprehension is a determining step in art. From the above, it is possible to state that art deals in the particular because it focuses on a particular period or event, the individual because it represents emotional state and is perceived differently and in the personal because it is observed on a personal level.
Science is the knowledge which deals with systematized observation about reality. In contrast to art, which is expressed through images, science is represented through concepts. These concepts give science the ability to describe, explain and predict. Scientific knowledge is a systematically proven and constantly verified knowledge. Science is therefore different from art because it is objective and impersonal. The influence of the individuals, the scientists, should be excluded as much as possible. In the process of its development, science often abandons previous phases and concentrates on further growth. Without doubt, the names of great scientists and their discoveries are not forgotten; however, for science in general they only contain historical value. One does not study the scientists on a personal level; instead one tends to focus on the theories that they developed.
There are many examples when artists were interested in science and technology, while scientists were inspired by arts. There have been remarkable parallels between the movements in art and the development in science. An example of such is the unity of space and time in relativity and the Cubist series of temporal views across space. At the same time, Albert Einstein was inspired by Fyodor Dostoevsky, claming that “Dostoevsky gives [him] more than any scientist, more than Gauss”.
In philosophy, the relationship between science and art is examined within the theory of knowledge called: gnosiology. In the past century, there was constant fight between the two theories: scientism and anti-scientism. From the scientism point of view, science has the highest cultural value. Anti-scientism points out that science limit us in the solution of human problems. It shows science as the antagonistic force that takes away from the freedom of will and creative individuality. One cannot observe the world merely through science, since the truth is also intuitive.
Thus, in the opinion of Italian philosopher B. Croce, science and art are the two stages of knowledge. The First stage is intuitive knowledge, which is achieved through imagination. An example of this is art. The second stage is the knowledge achieved through logic; the initial tool for which is intellect.
One should not minimize the role art plays in the understanding of the world. Art can be characterized as a reflection, which reproduces reality through images filled with emotions. Different forms of art, such as painting, theater or architecture, show the world at different perspectives. However, they can be combined to show an entire culture. Art can only be truly understood when it is put in context of time and place. For example, during Middle Ages, human size was often painted disproportional because it represented their position in society rather then their real body size. For art to have real value, it needs to somehow be relevant to the observer.
For many centuries, science has approached differentiation and fragmentation in different areas of science, and only recently there has been an attempt to come up with general concepts. However, art always gave a collective perception of the universe; it kept personal and cultural experience and was able to form humanity.
While science consists of specialized knowledge, which requires special abilities and skills, art tries to create the world by using imagination. Art differs itself from science because it does not have rules and does not have to be based on facts. At the same time, scientists constantly need to evaluate and reformulate old concepts. It often involves an intuitive leap to come up with a new invention, which is just as creative as painting.
Biological science is general, yet biology is a particular area of study. The doctor does not treat his or her patient as something general. Instead each person is treated as an individual, with a name, identity and subtle difference in biology. A successful doctor, therefore, does not only have general biological knowledge of the human body, but also has experience. There is a difference between the way biology characterizes a human and a particular patient, between the general explanation of the illness and its individual treatment. This shows that science is also related to the individual, the particular and the personal.
It is true that art refers to the individual and the personal in the sense that art reflects the individual and the personal vision of an artist. However, when considering art as a whole, a universal picture of the world is created. The difference is merely between the methods in which we receive the knowledge. While observing art, one gains knowledge from emotional experience, while in science, logical is used to explain an occurrence. Even though art is often individually oriented, the creations of art have an enormous value for humanity as a whole. Art is universal and general, even though the aesthetical concept of beauty depends on time and place. Art is able to accumulating experience which was collected for centuries.
Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, is usually obtained through scientific methods, which are seen as authentic. However, science on its own is not able explain the world, since it often fails to consider human factors. Art represents the intuitive stage of knowledge, while science consists of logical thinking. The intuitive method can also be used in science, while an art masterpiece can be a result of scientific research, such as Leonardo Da Vinci’s Human Proportions-Vitruvian Man. Knowledge which is obtained with the help of science, and knowledge, obtained with the help of art is fundamentally different and fulfills different tasks and goal, yet the combination of art and science provides complete human knowledge and can, therefore, be considered universal.
B. Croce, states that art and science are closely related and function together.
Bibliography
Aristotle, Metaphysics, BMM AO, 1975 Moscow
Bryan Magee, The Great Philosophers, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1987
Christian Stange, Dostoevsky Research Station, <> 1999
Nasif Nahle, Institute of Biological Research, <> 2000
Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy, Washington Square Press, New York 1926
Burton F. Beers, World History, Prentice Hall, New Jersey 1993
, Leonardo: The Artist and the Man, Penguin, London 1995
Aristotle, Metaphysics, BMM AO, 1975 Moscow
Bryan Magee, The Great Philosophers, Oxford University Press, 1987 Oxford
Christian Stange, Dostoevsky Research Station, <> 1999
Nasif Nahle, Institute of Biological Research, <> 2000
Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy, Washington Square Press, 1926 New York
Burton F. Beers, World History, Prentice Hall, 1993 New Jersey
, Leonardo: The Artist and the Man, Penguin, 1995 New York
