05-31-2017, 05:40 AM
I'm an artistically trained scientist, and a scientifically trained artist... to me, they're inextricable.
Scientific thinking provides three main advantages when it comes to reading poetry:
1. Scientists are not afraid to be wrong. If the evidence doesn't support the hypothesis, scientists will change the hypothesis and try again.
2. Science teaches objectivity. It's never entirely possible, but scientific thinking insists on removing the self and its biases from the equation as much as possible.
3. Scientists are used to making connections out of very little information. They're also quite capable of calling bullshit when the connection simply isn't there.
And artistic training has one great advantage over science:
Artists don't have to provide references. They're expected to just make shit up.
Scientific thinking provides three main advantages when it comes to reading poetry:
1. Scientists are not afraid to be wrong. If the evidence doesn't support the hypothesis, scientists will change the hypothesis and try again.
2. Science teaches objectivity. It's never entirely possible, but scientific thinking insists on removing the self and its biases from the equation as much as possible.
3. Scientists are used to making connections out of very little information. They're also quite capable of calling bullshit when the connection simply isn't there.
And artistic training has one great advantage over science:
Artists don't have to provide references. They're expected to just make shit up.
It could be worse