The Intellectual’s False Dilemma: Art vs Science

This certainly isn’t a call for readers to head to the Melbourne General Cemetery and begin digging up specimens, nor to transfer to a double degree in fine arts and biomedicine. Instead, the point is more about how fruitful interaction between the two domains can be, and how one requires the other to flourish. 

Returning briefly to South Lawn, the snarky liberal arts intellectual continues looking bored and takes out their copy of The Myth of Sisyphus. Sitting directly opposite them the scientist has gone back to finishing the latest New Scientist podcast and calculating a quantum theory of gravity. 

We have seen that science can inspire art, but how can art inspire science? 

“The greatest scientists are artists as well.” (5) So said perhaps the most well-known scientist of the modern century. Not only did Albert Einstein develop the special and general theory of relativity (we won’t get into the mathematical specifics for both our sakes), he was also a talented violinist and pianist. Einstein often credited his artistic side for his success in science, testifying that, "the theory of relativity occurred to me by intuition, and music is the driving force behind this intuition. My parents had me study the violin from the time I was six. My new discovery is the result of musical perception.” (6)

We have already seen how science prompts art to create new visions, and Einstein was no exception. His revolutionary ideas about space and time have been acknowledged as a prime artistic influence for Picasso’s arguably infamous Cubist style, as well as for the Surrealist art movement. (7)

But the arts are not just confined to visual and musical expression. How about the area of expertise of our liberal arts friends? Liberal arts as they are known today, include sociology, literature, philosophy, psychology, politics, and more. The knowledge and, most importantly, critical thinking that is learnt through humanistic education is perhaps key to the future of science. As the world changes and evolves, humans must change and evolve with it, creating innovative solutions along the way.

If we shift our focus to around the 1st century BCE, we will encounter what is widely regarded as the coining of the term artes liberales, or liberal arts. Roman statesman, scholar and writer Marcus Tullius Cicero wrote extensively about a wide array of topics, from politics and education to Stoic philosophy. “Artes liberales” roughly translates to “subjects worthy of a free person” - academic study that would enable one to actively participate in society (8). This curriculum consisted of a focus on seven key disciplines of rhetoric, geometry, grammar, music, astronomy, arithmetic, and logic. Liberal arts by nature are not the antithesis of science. From the crux of the artes liberales evolved the study of mathematics, physics, philology, history, and so on. Today we have reached a point where these seven disciplines have evolved and branched out so expansively that we have lost sight of the fact that our modern-day science and arts curriculums are sown from the same seed. 

Both science and art stem from the real world. Simply put, science is a lens into the study of this world and the inhabitants within it. Art is another lens into this complex system, providing a different but equally valuable perspective. Life is not binary, so neither should be our approach to studying it, and by virtue studying ourselves. Now is the time to embrace such transdisciplinary thinking. We need to bridge the gap between rigorous climate science facts and currently inadequate policy making, assess the ethics of the future of gene-editing, and ultimately become better thinkers. 

The combined intellectual strength of analytical thinking associated with science, where we learn how to test hypotheses, interpret data and draw valid conclusions; and the arts, where we learn critical thinking, how to develop arguments, how to understand a diverse audience, is necessary to keep humanity’s head above water as our world rapidly changes.

Take for example the future of the CRISPR-Cas9 editing tool. This enzyme-based tool allows scientists to remove or add sections of DNA sequence in our genome, our code for life. With this ‘hand of God’ comes great responsibility. Collaboration needs to be made between scientific thinkers and humanistic thinkers to identify what type of robust legislation needs to be implemented to ensure ethical use of this tool. It is no longer a case of scientists working in isolation in underground bunkers. Scientists are making huge strides in research that extend to and greatly impact the wider community. Cases like CRISPR-Cas9 demand a lens from science and a lens from the arts in order to see the full picture – and in this case, to ensure the ethical and safe practise of a tool that has potential to save lives and improve individuals’ quality of life – but this only happens if science and art function in harmony.

So back to you, the reader. Perhaps think about enrolling in that philosophy breadth subject next semester that your liberal arts friend raves about. Pick up that popular science book you have been eyeing off at Readings on Lygon St. Listen to that science podcast that keeps popping up on your Spotify homepage (The BBC’s The Infinite Monkey Cage is excellent). Pick up that paintbrush. Go visit Science Gallery Melbourne, a recent art scene addition affiliated with University of Melbourne – how fitting!

This isn’t Romeo and Juliet, where you are either a Capulet or a Montague. Rather, this is a case of wave-particle duality, where an electron is both a wave and a particle, and you are both an artist and a scientist. 

As the typical Melbourne wind continues to pick up and the Old Arts clocktower strikes 7:00 pm, it appears the liberal arts intellectual just swapped their copy of The Myth of Sisyphus for the scientists’ copy of Brief Answers to the Big Questions. Looks like they’re making progress.