Art and Science – La Cronica del Quindio
The Opinions expressed by columnists are from the sum and Absolute personal responsibility, without prejudice to the editorial or journalistic line of LA CRÓNICA SAS
Once upon a time, two parallel lines
Tired of walking alone
In infinity they met together.
When you know this unclean relationship
Scientists searched for how to refute it
More, same perspective
Once upon a time, there were two types of humans,
Rational and emotional.
In fantasy… the two met.
Since yesterday fell World Science Day, I’d like to share with you, in two batches, this article I wrote a few months ago about my view of art as a science.
Those who tell stories tell, it must be said, there are stories from stories and from accountants to vocalists, that the character who would shed light on this story, I liked to begin her lessons with a beautiful sentence “I come to tell you a story,” I was told by a philosopher of science thinker, Maestro Zanotti, who, like the story, explains at the beginning of his article Feyerabend in Sirio how to understand the context, according to him simplified, of the history of philosophy of science, to arrive at an interpretive analysis of the ideas of the main character in this story, the Austrian Paul Feyerabend.
For Feyerabend, Rawena says, “science is a creative game in which all the axioms and ways in which each scientist wants to carry out his project are true.” I, as in the series’ intertwined plot, and agonized over my teacher’s zero-sum, giving an unexpected turning point, want to use Feyerabend’s supposed “chaos” to use his argument that science is a creative game and a “fall” and, therefore, as a person pushed and pulled by gravity. , in research – creation as a means of generating knowledge.
I start from the following premise: if theory is the result of observation and reflection, translated into creativity, then why is aesthetic (practical) embodiment understood as art, which starts from the same processes, and cannot be the generation of scientific knowledge?
Our hero Feyerabend (as Propp calls him) wrote in 1970 in his book Natural Philosophy a paragraph that could give the key to finding the intersection or cutting point between parallel lines of art and science. They are clearly separated, and they don’t always follow each other in that order. Myth anticipates science, and science has mythical features; philosophy, science, and myths sometimes coexist peacefully, sometimes in conflict with the right to exist; “myths” and “prejudices” are everywhere.” This conflict enters, on a parallel course – like our lines – between myth and philosophy, art which claims the right to substantiate its reflections, critical judgments and aesthetic results.
Next week, if the positivists resist, we will continue with this tale.
see you online