What separates art from science. Could it be that it is subjective? With the title of this post, you’ve probably realized that I’m going to say that it is not. A dictionary might specify artwork as “a subjective artifact designed to be appreciated for its beauty or to cause emotions”. Science is objective. If you try to compute drive as something apart from mass times acceleration you likely won’t get the right answer. However when it involves art, it might have one influence on me and a totally different one on you.
So I guess art is subjective after all. Right now you’ve most likely realized that there surely is more to it. You see, the reason science is objective is that we can forecast due to a meeting before they happen. Let’s imagine someone named Ana. When she was a baby, Ana’s parents made her pay attention to upbeat happy music. As she was old, she began to regularly go to Broadway plays.
In school, her friends would tell jokes always. She was spent by her free time watching intimate films on Netflix. So easily made Ana watch Mama Mia dear little Ana is practically guaranteed to like it. It’s a Broadway play with upbeat music, romance, and jokes. Furthermore, there are hereditary qualities that help to forecast what kind of artwork each of us is into. Women have a tendency to choose music and romance, whereas, men would rather see action and assault.
So you can anticipate results in artwork just like in science. Now, you’re probably considering “but just because you understand someone might like a fine art doesn’t make it objective. I hate Broadway musical comedies, therefore, it must be subjective”. Well dear commenter, you’re right. Artwork either is not objective. Unless you like that genre, first, what’s wrong with you?
- Makeup clutter
- Wearing SPF 30 can provide you maximum coverage you need
- Face Palettes
- Non-Toxic, Washable
- 2x tablespoon Zinc Oxide
- 4 years ago from Indonesia
And second, there are reasons for why you wouldn’t like Mama Mia. Maybe you grew up watching sports and thrillers (again, what’s incorrect with you?). I’m not stating that art is objective, I’m saying art is relative. That is to say, taste in artwork is reasonable and predictable. Science can also be relative.
Take psychology for example. Much like art, psychology is dependant on our character and nurture. A woman who was raised comfortably with parents who have been always there for her will react very differently to a predicament when compared to a man who grew up with mostly absent parents. So some realms of research can be pretty much like artwork. To answer the question I asked at the start, “what separates art from science?”, the answer is nothing. Art is a technology. The relative research of creating feelings in the viewer, listener, etc. That is clearly a much better description than the one from the first paragraph. In that person, Meriam-Webster!