This blog post will consider the art vs
science debate and whether there is a great deal of difference between the two
or whether they could work in conjunction with each other. Both art and science
form part of the national curriculum from key stage one to key stage three,
however science is seen as a core subject whereas art is not. This blog
post will aim to bring to light what makes them different or what makes them
similar. It could be argued that to think of one as more creative than the
other is a process which allows for realisation that both art and science
encourage pupils to be creative, although in different ways.
The art
vs science debate is often referred to as stem (Science, technology, engineering
& math) vs steam (science, technology, engineering, arts & maths). It is
becoming more noticeable that current students do not have the required skills
for the job market. It has been argued that changing stem to steam will allow
for students to develop skills that had previously been thought of as unnecessary.
Allowing for stem to become steam with the introduction of the arts allows for
re-enlightenment in regard to a subject matter. Many school children find
science fascinating when conducting experiments, but tend to bore quickly if
this is not the case, however when integrating the arts a new dimension of
understanding is formed which can develop new and better idea’s.
It has
been of argument that creativity is based on what side of the brain is used to
complete the thought process. However, this links to multiple intelligence
theory which was devised by Howard Gardener. Multiple intelligence theory
suggests that if we use the whole of the brain then this allows for different
intelligences to flourish.
When it
comes to art, it is often seen as subjective to interpretation opposed to
science which is determined by methodology followed when forming a conclusion. In
regard to this it must be considered whether the work of Leonardo Da Vinci is
art or whether the work that he conducted and the method’s he used determines
him as a scientist. At Da Vinci’s time the thought of science was scarce as
science was derived from religion. However, it could be argued that Da Vinci
was an early scientist as he was methodical in creating art. The work of Da
Vinci is still used today in science, work such as anatomical drawings. Da
Vinci recognised that if an experiment was conducted a number of times there
was the possibility of different results. (TEDx Talks, 2015) . The golden ration
is a mathematical calculation which determines the number within a sequence. The golden ratio is used throughout all of Da Vinci's work as the sequence allowed him to show proportion.
 |
| Mona Lisa drawn with Golden ratio effect |
In
conclusion it can be seen that art and science are not completely separate entities
but they should be embraced within each other to allow further development of
skills that are needed for the job market. The integration of the arts with
science allows for a renowned understanding of a topic and can reaffirm
interest within the topic. This blog post has sought to demonstrate whether art
and science can be brought together and drawing from the work of Leonardo Da
Vinci, has determined that although art is subjective and science is
progressive they can work as one, this was demonstrated by the works of Da
Vinci who used anatomical drawings which are still used today in the medical
profession.
No comments:
Post a Comment