版 版

版权声明：转载时请以超链接形式标明文章原始出处和作者信息及本声明
http://banban.blogbus.com/logs/39021572.html

People are forcing themselves to choose, too much, between art and science, between realistic and idealistic, etc. Mae Jemison called for the rejoining of art and science. We divided art and science a few centuries ago, but it's time to combine them again. Art and science are parts of us. It is foolish to choose one and externalize the other. As a human being, we can be creative and logical, analytical and intuitive, constructive and deconstructive when dealing with problems. There is no confine in between. They are not even on the two ends of the same dimension, but a unity. Daina Tamina used the most domestic feminist art to solve the problem which had been troubled the most famous mathematicians for a century. Sean Gourley demonstrated to the sociologists that strategies in the war and policies in the Iraq can be directed by a mathematical slope. Modern art is a combination of creativity, philosophy and scientific analyses. Scientific research always tries to find implication and link to the big pictures, and is never separated from creativity, intuition and passion.

Same happened on realistic and idealistic too. As one grows up, people start to emphasis being realistic. But a life without dream is a disarster. People generally misunderstand that the older one grows, the less likely one has dream. If that were the case, what is it about the hope of parents on their kids? A complete human being needs both. Ideas open to a person flourish of experiences, while understanding the feasibilities raises options. Why can't we have both?

There is variation in the world, but it is not necessary to always choose between them.