Art and Science

Art would not exist without science. Would science exist without art? I think the two subject areas depend heavily on one another. Painters benefit from studying optics just as musicians can improve their vocals through studying sound waves. Could science remain a subject matter without the presence of art? After completing the readings I explored the science and art combination.

David Peat, who has authored over twenty books on popular science, stated that “It is generally argued that, historically, art and science arouse out of the same ground, or that a time existed when they were not considered to be distinct pursuits(Peat.)” After this time the European countries began recognizing the artist with a notion of “genius”, at this time art and science began to separate in to two fields of study (Peat.) However, while art and science may have become separate and distinct ares today, it is also true that artists have always shown an interest in science and technology(Peat.)

Peat argues that science has little dependence on art. Peat said “the interaction between art and science flows in one direction, that artists become interested in science, its methods and concepts, and incorporate them in loose ways within their own work, but that science gains little to nothing from art.” Does science need art in order to flourish? As an artist, I am constantly seeking inspiration from the outside world. I was taught that science was about observing, identifying, describing and experimenting the world(Science.) Without science’s presence as a form of inspiration, I think art would suffer. I would be interested to hear art from a scientific perspective. Do scientists need art?




Peat, David. "Ideas on Art and Science." N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Mar 2010. .


"Science." Dictionary.com. Random House, 2010. Web. 22 Mar 2010. .