The two articles “The Art of the Brain” and “Art as a way of Knowing” both have to do with how understand and analyzing art can be viewed as a scientific process and how art and science are so greatly interwoven that some will argue that art and science are one in the same. The article, Art of the Brain states that art is done so that people can view the art and understand or perhaps learn something new about the art. Immediately, this sounds like a scientific journey, where something previously unknown is observed, analyzed, interpreted and then understood to a higher degree. There are several hypotheses in the article that contrast art and science in their respective complexities and how “art renders complexity” while science is viewed through a very narrow lense with perhaps a more direct path. In my mind I pictured the TED talk we watched in class about a month ago where a route from A to B was drawn and another less direct route was drawn from A that led to C. I felt like in this way C was the “artistic” approach because it had encompassed several forks and turns but inevitably led to some answer, regardless if it was the same answer that B held.
The other article, Art as a way of Knowing, is primarily trying to explain how art is just as important in terms of learning as science is. I agree with the notion stated in both articles that art and science are so alike but also believe that the ways that people learn from both differ greatly. When looking at art, your mind opens up and ideas formulate and try to explain what exactly you are looking at. Science on the other hand can be looked at more pragmatically, where facts and widely accepted theories are trying to be accepted by learners through studious efforts.