To analyze the relations between art and science, philosophers and historians have developed diff... more To analyze the relations between art and science, philosophers and historians have developed different lines of inquiry. A first type of inquiry considers how artistic and scientific practices have interacted over human history. Another project aims to determine the contributions (if any) that scientific research can make to our understanding of art, including the contributions that cognitive science can make to philosophical questions about the nature of art. We rely on contributions made to these projects in order to demonstrate that art and science are co-dependent phenomena. Specifically, we explore the co-dependence of art and science in the context of an historical analysis of their interactions and in the context of contemporary debates on the cognitive science of art. Philosophers and historians have developed different types of research projects to analyze the relations between art and science. A first type of inquiry considers how artistic and scientific practices have interacted over human history. Another line of research aims to determine the contributions (if any) that scientific methods can make to our understanding of art, including the contributions that cognitive science can make to philosophical questions about the nature of art. In this article, we critique the 'Two Cultures' view that separates art history from the history of science and holds that scientific methods are irrelevant to our philosophical understanding of art. By contrast to this view, we argue that the arts and the sciences are co-dependent phenomena. Specifically, we explore the co-dependence of the arts and the sciences in the broad context of an historical analysis of their interactions and in the specific context of contemporary debates on the cognitive science of art.
To analyze the relations between art and science, philosophers and historians have developed diff... more To analyze the relations between art and science, philosophers and historians have developed different lines of inquiry. A first type of inquiry considers how artistic and scientific practices have interacted over human history. Another project aims to determine the contributions (if any) that scientific research can make to our understanding of art, including the contributions that cognitive science can make to philosophical questions about the nature of art. We rely on contributions made to these projects in order to demonstrate that art and science are co-dependent phenomena. Specifically, we explore the co-dependence of art and science in the context of an historical analysis of their interactions and in the context of contemporary debates on the cognitive science of art. Philosophers and historians have developed different types of research projects to analyze the relations between art and science. A first type of inquiry considers how artistic and scientific practices have interacted over human history. Another line of research aims to determine the contributions (if any) that scientific methods can make to our understanding of art, including the contributions that cognitive science can make to philosophical questions about the nature of art. In this article, we critique the 'Two Cultures' view that separates art history from the history of science and holds that scientific methods are irrelevant to our philosophical understanding of art. By contrast to this view, we argue that the arts and the sciences are co-dependent phenomena. Specifically, we explore the co-dependence of the arts and the sciences in the broad context of an historical analysis of their interactions and in the specific context of contemporary debates on the cognitive science of art.
Uploads
Papers by Nicolas Bullot