/lit/ - Literature

Science can't go to far. It's unstoppable

science didn't kill art, just beauty

>>4970806
Entertaiment killed art. Science is too autistic.

>>4970806
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures

I feel like science has ruined many things.
the new wave of internet atheists supports "science" as something opposed to religion which I think is absurd, modern science pretends to discover truths about the universe, mankind and others while most of this knowledge was already ours since millenia. science has made many lives TOO easy... at great costs, on quality of life, on the environment, and on many moral levels, however subjective that may be.

I liked science better when it was more about helping our lives out of our shit conditions and not about creating more and more comforts we don't need. I also preferred science when it was there in the service of faith and not against it.

>>4970825
science is the new religion

which is to say, what the herd flocks to when they need answers

and of course now we have Neil smoke(da grass) tyson and the whole nerd culture. It's just so COOL!

>>4970825
cont.

when science attempts to dethrone art it will ultimately fail. Because science is merely the documentated knowledge of the immensity of our universe, where art is the expression of our awe. in other words, art emcopasses both the science and the awe.

>>4970814
>this is what autistics actually believe

>>4970827
Religion is just a synonym for wrong
Science isn't wrong
Religion is created by man
Science is discovered by man
there is difference
and just because people are flocking to science instead of religion it doesn't make it a religion faggot
it just means people are finally seeing the truth
get over it
your faggot religion is just as wrong and just as full as devout believers as every religion before it
you're desert stories are just the next on the list on a long piece of parchment titled "bullshit that people who can't understand science believes"

nothing killed art
shut up

>>4970840
>Religion is created by man
Science is discovered by man
How can someone be so wrong

>>4970825
lol, most all working physicists have long since given up the idea of science bearing truths about the world

I think science has dulled art by reducing rarity.

it's edgy biologists and cognitive pseudoscientists that see science as a religion

>>4970838
Science can't kill art. 4chan /sci/ disregarding any form of art is not the same as killing it. That being is said, it's not a dichotomy, you can get an aestethic experience from science discoveries and such.

>>4970822
I like how this is ignored.

>>4970858
>"Today, bereft of understanding of fundamental issues and writings in the development of liberal democracy, computer geeks devise ever better ways to track people... simply because they can and it's cool. Humanists on the other hand do not understand the underlying technology and are convinced, for example, that tracking meta-data means the government reads their emails"
top kek, "computer geeks" know very well the utility of such systems, and meta-data is useful to know about someone, even if they don't read emails (which they also do....). also, some 3rd party is using these systems for their profit, namely, economic espionage to steal ideas and business opportunities.

Art killed itself by going the way of postmodernism and trendy hipster 2deep4u shit.

Science hahs nothing to do with it.

>>4970858
forgot to mention: such divide happens because the advance of technology requites highly specialized knowledge, and this also requires dedication, i.e., time not spent on arts, for example

>>4970825
>I also preferred science when it was there in the service of faith and not against it.
It should be completely removed from faith, it's a tool.

>>4970825
>I liked science better when it was more about helping our lives out of our shit conditions and not about creating more and more comforts we don't need. I also preferred science when it was there in the service of faith and not against it.

You must be pretty old, anon...

Religious Fucking Wackadoos. Learn that you're all stupid, please.

>>4970840
Science isn't something that can be discovered. Science is a method and process of continual refinement using that method. Science is not the name for a body of facts. It is a tool we use to attempt to refine our understanding until it aligns with facts.

It's become a major problem that people are calling things "science" or "scientific" when they aren't proven to be factual. For example, we have modern materialists supposing that there can be no life after death because consciousness arises from chemical interactions in the brain, and calling that scientific. The problem is that this is based on a currently unscientific assumption. In this example, we run in to one of the primary questions in modern neuroscience: from where does consciousness arise?

We can assume it arises from chemical interactions because that is a simple explanation that fits some of the data we have, but that is really only a guess. The nature of consciousness is still largely a mystery, and yet it is so often called "science" that consciousness arises from chemical interactions. One day we may actually prove it as a fact fact, discovered by the scientific method, but as of now it isn't science.

This is where the accusations of "science" being a religion comes about. Science cannot be a religion by its very nature, but people often colour in the dark areas around the fringes of science regarding the "hard questions" in life to suit their viewpoint, and then claim it is supported by science. What we're talking about is really the growth of a materialist belief system, which, similar to religion, posits answers to questions that are often nearly impossible to answer. The only credibility they gain is by using the currently limited data set of modern human knowledge to justify for their reasoning. It's still only speculation, though.

They would be much more intellectually honest if they were to answer "I don't know yet" to the things we truly do not know, even if they have some unproven hypothesis in mind.

there's a difference between scientism, which is fundamentally philistine, and science

>>4970825
>the new wave of internet atheists supports "science" as something opposed to religion which I think is absurd
ya this is scientism

>>4970844
>lol, most all working physicists have long since given up the idea of science bearing truths about the world
most biologists too. p<0.05 is good enough.

>>4970830
Science and the arts are two sides of the same coin.

>>4970844
As a working physicist I would like to ask you to talk out your ass less.

>>4970940
this guy's got IQ

>>4971089
>this guy's got IQ
I said the same in one line: >>4970849

>>4971104
Maybe in your mind you did. Doesn't read the same at all.

This guy, on the other hand: >>4971000

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you misquoted your post.

>>4971114
I can't explain shit in one line, and if I could, I'm too lazy to do it. and no, I didn't misquote

>>4970849
>it's edgy biologists and cognitive pseudoscientists that see science as a religion
it's 16 year old retards on the internet who see science as a religion

Fucking "I fucking love science" and all that other bullshit

>>4970806
Art as an institution lost the respect of the public when it went edgy & 2deep4u without any real message or beauty behind it. Now it's just pop entertainment with no substance for the most part, but there's still a lot of good out there obviously.

Science isn't a religion it is a tool. You faggots pining for some golden age where science didn't stick its nose into religion & other sacred spaces are literally retarded, those days were known as pre-history. Science is not a person and it doesn't have agency, it has no drive to do good over bad. It just progresses, and it is us that has to adapt to the new reality. We are going to live in a world where you are treated as what you are, a sack of meat that can be of some use. Romanticism is dead, there is no going back.

All of that said, the retarded SCIENCE SO KEWL stuff at the moment is incredibly cringey, but at the same time if it is making people aware of some things they would never otherwise have seen I can't say it's that bad

It happened organically.

Who gives a shit, can we all just stop reproducing now? This twisted game has been overplayed for millennia.

>>4971299
This post is the most reasonable thing I've seen on /lit/ for weeks.

>>>/realworld/

hey, butthurt christfags
please remove yourselves from 4chan
thank you very much

science: nothing is certain until there is proof of it, "i don't know YET" is a valid answer
religion: the things my ancient book heavily modified by ancient feudal lords to fit their agenda is absolute truth, no proof required

>>4971299
1) i agree with your dislike of modernist (and modernist-influenced) formal bullshit, but you're being fucking sixteen
>now it's pop entertainment
>without any real message or beauty

beauty is an extremely useless way of thinking about art, literally no one with a decent understanding of aesthetics takes it seriously in 2014

and art has always been entertainment, books started as oral storytelling, classical music started as folk music for people to dance to, etc

the idea that art was the biggest fucking thing didn't really take off until the Romantics got on the scene

2)
>science is a tool
>it just progresses

if science is a tool, we can control how it is used, you're saying that we have control but then making it this inevitable historical force

additionally

>we're going to live in a world where you are treated as what you are, a sack of meat that can be of some use

>science has made capitalist commodity fetishism permanent, because muh god is ded

also, "science" didn't even exist until around when copernicus told everyone earth went around the sun, so i don't really know how it could stick its nose anywhere

>Romanticism is dead

seeing as you still engage in discourses of beauty, not really

goddamn pseudo-intellectuals, step it up

>>4971621
>beauty is an extremely useless way of thinking about art, literally no one with a decent understanding of aesthetics takes it seriously in 2014
You're pretty dumb for someone who thinks himself smart; your misunderstanding of the concept of beauty is hilarious to read.

Science only killed philosophy. Art died for other reasons.

>>4971740
that's not beauty that's a high definition picture of a random spider.

>>4971740
Congratulations, regardless of how correct either of you are, by responding to his argument that was unsupported by anything other than insult with nothing more than an insult, you've managed to put yourself below him

>>4971772
>ad hominem

I feel like the Science/Art juxtaposition is really unhelpful, and mostly emerges from particular constrained ideas about what the Arts are, and what sort of power and respectability they possess.

Science and the Art are not impenetrable, immutable concepts. They have almost always been infiltrated, hijacked, or directed by ideologies (religious, political, economic, philosophical, etc.).

So is it really any coincidence that the narratives that are most 'consumed' by 21st century western man, and which make change and control behaviour in our world are not vaunted 'traditional' or 'classic' forms so much as the lightning fast utilitarian forms (advertising, entertainment, media) of the dominant ideologies, and the great powers of our time?

>>4971783
You could consider it an argument ad hominem, yes. Although, usually, ad hominem implies insults that are mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand. These arguments are indeed very relevant, but completely unsupported.

>>4970916
M O D E R N art is evidently precedent to P O S Tmodernism. Art deviated itself from any bullshit classicist conceptions you bitch niggas might have before photography came around with late mannerism and the romantics analysis of it (and since most people usually say that modern art isn't art, a lot of plebs love to claim the biggest catalyst for modern art was photography. It might have been to non-figurative painting, and even then, when non-figurative painting came around photography was somewhat old already.

What really started non-academycal art was WWI and the failure of the bourgeois project)

Also, it's the philosophers fault for falling mouths wide open into modern art and I fucking love modern art, and postmodern art, tbh, my main issue is with contemporary art, which I find too edgy.

science & art both make the world more beatiful and provide insight in complementary ways hth

>>4971299
>Beauty
Well, you're using "beauty" as "obligation to reality" here pal, if you take a "beautiful" painting from the renaissance and one from mannerism or from simbolism, the "beauty" is extremely different.

It's just that when the 20th century came around, people realized that this idillic beauty was driving us nowhere while the world was falling to pieces.

The fact that you say art is "edgy & 2deep4u" just goes to show you're not interested in it, since A) there are people still working with nearly-platonic levels of "ideal beauty" as well as a myriad of forms of "beauty" by different points of view happening right now, not to mention the art that purposedly aims to be ugly.

And no, people aren't getting aware of things they wouldn't know now anymore than kids were getting aware of things they wouldn't know 50 years ago with the silver age's Flash "Flash Facts".

They absorbo nothing but the brute information of it, they do mental aerobics enough that the alleged knowledge of that bit of information won't change absolutely a thing from their day to day lives.

>>4971571
That's not religion, that's christianism (or, at best, abrahamic religions"

both art and science are a development of the abstract inside the most powerful form of realism.

>art is dead
learn to use google and open your eyes a little wider

>science is a way of determining truth
you have your heisenberg very wrong in there

>>4971940
heisenbergs uncerteinty principle has nothing to do with truth

science has been given too much weight. it's not surprising considering this age of technological and scientific advancement, but we all must see the effect it is having on culture and people. i hope it will balance out in the future.

>>4971973
maybe but at least him and gobel got most of the determinist positivists to stfu and science a new chance to explore the mystic
anyways the development of most modern physics' theories are getting to a point that mere causal logic can't accept. ideas in modern science are way more interesting that what's been happening in philosophy since heidegger and artist are fusing with scientist more than ever creating stuff that's unthinkable but yet incredible. i've been to venice's biennale last year and i have to say there were many science inspired works that blew off my mind and made me reconsider all my artistic vision to the moment

>>4970806
>That horrendous kerning on awed/a wed.

If anything, art is infecting science.

I can't remember their names, but there's a bunch of people doing completely useless (from a capitalist, utilitarian point of view) objects and even organisms whose only purpose is aesthethic or philosophical reflection using state of the art (no pun intended) technology

This guy being a great example www.ekac.org

>>4971621
>if science is a tool, we can control how it is used, you're saying that we have control but then making it this inevitable historical force
some peple DOES have the control over science. in capitalism, science is controlled by capitalists, directly or through the government.

>There’s no denying the fact that many Koreans are obsessed with plastic surgery – some of them will do anything to look more ‘western’. So imagine my surprise when I read about this Brazilian guy who underwent 10 cosmetic procedures to look more Korean! It seems like no one is happy with their own native looks anymore

>This man was perfectly good-looking to begin with, but he wanted the Oriental look so bad, he put himself through a series of procedures – silicone implants, lip surgery, and more – that cost him a small fortune. The 25-year-old, from Novo Hamburgo city in southern Brazil, goes by the name Xiahn; he doesn’t want to reveal his true identity to protect his family from internet scrutiny. Xiahn originally had blue eyes and blond hair, a look that he was perfectly happy with until he spent time as an exchange student at Dongseo University in South Korea. It was there that he got bit by the plastic surgery bug.

>>4970843
Science is a practice, a way of discovering things whatever they may be. Saying somebody discovered science is like saying somebody discovered thinking.

Science and Technology are abyssal. You can spend as much time innovating as you want, but that is at the cost of natural resources, livelyhoods, the collective unity of all people, etc. It doesn't end. It is a suicidal uphill battle to nowhere. Whoopity doo, you have some shiny things. Say something when you aren't killing each other over lines of chalk and frivolous policy.

>also, "science" didn't even exist until around when copernicus told everyone earth went around the sun, so i don't really know how it could stick its nose anywhere

No its always existed, ever since we were capable of expanded thought.

>>4972633
That sounds luddite as fuck. Please get your head outta your medievalist ass.

>>4972633
>hippies

>>4972643
Medievalism, huh? I love isms. Ism. Schism. Ism Ism. Schism. Ism Ism Ism Ism. Look how divided you all are!

>>4970827
Only vaguely related, but I just want to share this story
>At the time deGrasse Tyson was just a 17-year-old kid from the Bronx with dreams of being a scientist, but Sagan had invited him to spend a Saturday with him in Ithaca at Cornell University, after seeing his application to attend University there.
He toured their labs there, and Sagan gave him a book, "The Cosmic Connection" and inscribed it "to a future astronomer":

>At the end of the day, he drove me back to the bus station. The snow was falling harder. He wrote his phone number, his home phone number, on a scrap of paper. And he said, "If the bus can't get through, call me. Spend the night at my home, with my family."

I already knew I wanted to become a scientist, but that afternoon I learned from Carl the kind of person I wanted to become. He reached out to me and to countless others. Inspiring so many of us to study, teach, and do science. Science is a cooperative enterprise, spanning the generations.

I just think this was an awesome move by Sagan.

Spreading knowledge, good.
Democratizing knowledge, bad.
Epistemic limits, not fatal.

When a painting can do the work of a vaccine, do let me know.

There is no symmetry between fact and fiction from the perspective of objective reality. That none of us can perceive it leads us to think there might not be a difference.

Science is good for finding out what isn't true, objectively. Art is good for finding out what is true, subjectively. Theories are artistic explanations of all relevant facts and data gathered from falsifiable experiments and subjective but controlled observations.

Evolution is a narrative. Selection and mutation, extinction and survival, these are objective truths.

Humans need art to make sense of science, and without science art can't have meaning because there is nothing for symbols to root in.

>>4970814
exactly, the fucking entertaiment industry with their lack of depth thinking in letters, music, plastic arts etc, has being killing the main arts for decades, there still people working on the good deed or at least admiting that a lot of what is presented to the audience this days is shit. Mario Vargas Llosa in his work The Civilization of Entertainment explain this situations in the diferents fronts of our society (arts, politics, ideologys and culture in general).
Science have his own path and their performers will keep advancing for just their thirst of knowledge. Have nothing to do with art or the definition of beauty.

>>4972698
how's that any different from any other field of study though

discovering things isn't some form of mental stimulation purely limited to science, and frankly, most, if not all the conflict seems to stem from people who either have an inferiority/superiority complex on some angle of science vs philosophy/art

science fags and liberal arts fags need to fag together

>>4975446
capitalism and the repercussions of it thereof seem to be the primary driving force of science atm