Which is more interesting, art or science?
Some people are artistic others are more inclined towards science some like both equally but which do you think is the more interesting?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
20 Answers
Science, although I wish I would have paid more attention in high school.
Im not sure. So many things interest me that it’s really hard to tell which is more interesting than the other.
I find science slightly more interesting than art.
I’m more drawn to art, personally. There are many aspects of science that I find fascinating, but I find it difficult to think in terms of formulae and probabilities. Art is something I can participate in much more easily.
The point of science is to convey truth and therefore is objective in nature.
The point of art is to convey humanity and therefore subjective.
I find art far more interesting as it affords the individual opportunity to interpret the aesthetic without an intermediary.
I’m more drawn to science, even though I am a registered Native American artist. To me science is very interesting, while art is just a natural act.
Art appeals to my senses. Science stimulates my mind. As much as I appreciate it, I can live without man-made art, as I find it in nature every day. Science explains the how and the why. As a curious person, I’d have to go with science.
Why choose? Blending them has led to all sorts of wonderful things.
I find that art has more room for creativity and expression. Though I enjoy science it’s rules are too concrete for me and there is barely any room for expression.
Also, if you are into music (for example) you can play in an ensemble and work as a team. You end up using parts of your brain that you wouldn’t normally use.
The feeling that I experience when playing music, acting, or expressing myself through art is not even close to being comparable with doing a science lab.
Acting gets rid of all of my shy qualities for a time when I am playing a character on stage and I enjoy the vibrance of the people that I am acting with.
Through art I have looked at the world in a much broader way, and I think that art opens many more doors than science for ME. Other people may have different opinions but I say that I enjoy art much more than science.
I much prefer art, I like how through it, you can examine what it is to be human. It’s also often funky.
Not saying science isn’t interesting; it sure is, but I don’t feel that passionate flame with it as I do with art.
I find science more interesting than art, but I find art more pleasurable than science. I’m better at art than I am at science.
Art! I love to see the creativity being expressed.
Art for me because art is music, paintings, sculptures, literature. You can take anything and make it art. I love science, but I love music more, and it’s much more interesting to find combinations of different notes to make the most beautiful music you’ve heard.
I love science, but as Hazel Swaine Rossotti put it so beautifully in Colour: Why the World Isn’t Grey…
“How far will chemistry and physics help us understand the appeal of a painting?”
Science!
Art is just there. iI might be nice to look at for a moment, but it simply cannot inspire the wonder, awe, excitement and realization that science can.
And I say this even though I do create a fair bit of art myself.
For me, @crisw, “wonder, awe and excitement” aren’t limited to science. I like to go to the Kimbell Museum in Fort Worth, TX and stand inches away from Rembrandt’s incredible painting, Bust of a Young Jew, painted 347 years ago. In one eye there’s a tiny daub of white oil paint that looks like, well, like oil paint. Stand a few feet back and that same daub is radiant sunlight glinting in that eye. Me, I’m as much in awe of that three-century old dot of oil as I am watching a man walk on the moon’s lifeless surface or knowing that a computer with the horsepower of a Nintendo game got the crippled Apollo 13 back to earth safely.
Answer this question 
