/lit/ - Literature

>>7212811
Because they care more about science than art.

>why are banausoi such banausoi?

DUDE KETCHUP LMAO

>>7212811
Not everyone of them. A lot of great authors were also scientists/engineers.

Why don't artists read arxiv papers on cuckolding in the protista kingdom all day?

I just can't imagine a more predictable, pop culture reference laden product than the martian.

It take the bourgeois "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" morality nonsense to the next level of impossibly overly optimistic.

>>7212842
>not believing some hot astronaut's life is worth the world's gdp/intellectual resources.

>>7212811
I feel like science is an art, if it wasn't for science we would still be in the paleolithic, if it wasn't for science we would not discover the amazing wonders of the universe, like we're simply stardust, tha's poetic, stars had to die for us to be here. Science is more artistic than any other form of artistic expression i can think of.

>>7212842
>pull yourself up by your bootstraps nonsense

Fuck off back to tumblr

>>7212863
They can discover things, yes, but they seem to lack the ability to understand the poetic nature of existence or rather how to express what they've found in any way other than aspie-themed spreadsheets and LoTR references.

>>7212864
Maybe it's an exaggeration, but do you really drink the "the haves and soon-to-haves" kool aid? American economic values are a ponzi scheme.

>>7212863
The fuck does that have to do with science? That's just reality. Christ i wish STEMfags would stop acting like no one thought the night sky was beautiful before fucking galileo

Good movie tbh.

contrarian shills will be contrarian shills though i.e. OP

English/math double major here. It's because they are all completely convinced that study of the humanities is pointless, where as study of science is fruitful. This is mostly based on earnings figures that they think are justified, which to them obviates any question of "well but what is life for then" or "how should you spend your free time once you have all that money."

STEM types, as a rule, fetishise both an abstract concept of "science" and, less explicitly and more insidiously, work and their jobs. An unfunny, aesthetically null 400-page Reddit post about the ultimate worker bee trying to save himself because his Good Ass Science Knowledge is so valuable to humanity is basically their Holy Grail as far as art goes.

>>7212863
>if it wasnt science we'd still be in the paleolithic

Lmao.

>>7212888
there's an order of magnitude difference in the reasoning between scientific beauty and artistic beauty.
and it isn't "reality". you need to interpret reality through the lens of science (order, rationality, symmetry, etc) or art (chaos, irrational, natural, magic, etc)

>>7212894
do you actually believe this? Please say no

>>7212906
Do I think it's true for everyone who works in STEM? No. It's not true for my friends, who are all cool enlightened socialist scientists who read Kim Stanley Robinson. It is true for the majority of STEM people though, which explains a whole fucking lot - especially the prevalence of libertarians in Silicon Valley.

Is there a single person out there who doesn't believe in the value of art? Serious question.

>>7212917
This is such a superficial, child-like thought process

>>7212917
what does it say about all the retards who gravitate to marxism on this board?

>>7212932
Sorry to hear you think so but it's correct. Have you seen Neil DeGrasse Tyson's reaction to this artistic abomination? And that's the guy articulate enough to be appointed as their spokesman.

>>7212920
Yes.

I have a STEM friend that does not enjoy and refuses to listen to music.

Another going to Harvard Law that is made uncomfortable by anything without direct literal interpretation.

And I have a Finance friend that categorically hates any film made with practical effects and has never to my knowledge read any book for pleasure.

>>7212863

>looking at what's in front of your face is artistic

Please don't try to talk like you somehow know what you're saying.

>>7212943
What does what say about that? I'm not sure I said anything relevant to that question. I'm not a Marxist but there are stupid Marxists and smart Marxists, like just about every other ideology in the world. There are smart STEM libertarians too. Being smart doesn't mean you're right about shit.

>>7212945
holy shit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF4qpxAqVSM

>>7212920

Like, the majority of the western world? Pretty much every country has been doing their best to shut down cultural education for the past decade.

>>7212945
The fact you've bought into memes like: 'all STEM interested people - minus my cool friends - are all drones and don't get it like i do even though i'm basing this literally on the satirisation of these people on le ebin 4chan' is very sad and certainly not correct.

Hopefully you're memeing, if not, seriously get a grip dude

>>7212863
You're either an idiot or a clever troll. By definition, science cannot be art, and it is language that propelled us from the Neolithic Age, not science.

>>7212983
I'm still not sure what you disagree with other than my tone and the fact that my opinion is similar to other opinions you've seen before (does "memes" really mean anything more than that)? I also don't really get what your stakes are here. Did you love The Martian or something?

>>7212905
You're retarded. Stop talking about something you know nothing about.

There is science in art and art in science

>>7213004
Disagree with your opinions, would've thought that was clear. Stakes are small, same as almost all discussion on forums. The martian was quite enjoyable.

>>7213020
It wasn't clear, since you never said a single thing you disagreed with, just that my thoughts were childish and memes. Have a blessed day.

>>7212970
jesus christ

``After a certain high level of technical skill is achieved, science and art tend to coalesce in esthetics, plasticity, and form. The greatest scientists are artists as well.`` -- Albert Einstein

I agree with this to a certain extent. For me, the scientific and artistic process are very similar with the main difference being their purpose. One is seeking to find a way to express objective truth, the other to express a subjective truth like emotions and perception.
Both seek to understand the world. Engineers try to give form to nature like artists. Both, aim to build something, to create something novel.
I am an engineer who writes fiction in my spare time. I am also a composer and i draw often. I only went to college to learn engineering because the technical ceiling in STEM is really high compared to any art, and you need to grasp the technical stuff to be able to be creative and explore the field in an ``artistic way``.
Art doesn`t need, and actually can`t be taught in college. The only thing you can learn is the technical part required for your craft. The rest is self-expression. This is the main reason, i think, people view STEM as something unrelated to arts. Because of some academic division that shouldn`t exist in the first place.

"Science is the poetry of reality" - Richard Dawkins

>>7213047
>One is seeking to find a way to express objective truth, the other to express a subjective truth like emotions and perception.
This is one of those made up distinctions.

It presupposes both seek a "truth" which is both not necessarily the case and the distinction between objective and subjective is impossible to distinguish from a subjective viewpoint.

>>7212863
>if it wasn't for science we would still be in the paleolithic

>>7213034
either dense or choosing not to address what i said in the subsequent post. Have a blessed day.

>>7212970
>you just can't go wrong if you're going to use science as a verb.

>>7213076
It's true that I didn't respond to your engage with your considered opinion that I am "very sad and certainly not correct." Guilty as charged.

>>7212839
Name 5

Are there truths that you can't express scientifically?
Are there truths that you can't express poetically?

Oh, I see a lot of artistic people here.

But i have a long-lasting question of mine, you might want to answer. Not a troll, just really interested in the thing.

What is the point of art? What is art?

I am a materialist. I'd like to have some other ideology, but cant really see any good alternatives. From a materialistic point of view, the "art" basically means "the thingy that people like to look at". It is a simplified definition, but still, you got the idea. And with that definition, there's no such a thing as objectively "bad art" or "good art", there's just things that people like more, or they like less. And from that point of view, there's no real difference between "The martian" and *put_the_name_of_the_most_adored_by4chan_book".

If there were some kind of objective usefulness of art, we could differentiate it. We could tell something is better or worse. But there's not such a thing, or it's existence has not yet been proven. So, is there something like that? Or it's just the "spiritual feelings"?

Thanks for your attention.


P.S. Not a native English speaker, sorry for possible mistakes.

>>7213058
I disagree with you.

Objective truth have to be validated through reason. Have to be in check with the reality of everyone.
Subjective truth in the other hand only need to be in check with personal feelings and emotions. Only need to be true in one`s perception of the world.

But anyway, i don`t actually care that much about this kind of discussion. I enjoy art that is more experience then thought.

This is a great post about science and art
>https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/imagine/201003/einstein-creative-thinking-music-and-the-intuitive-art-scientific-imagination

>>7213144
"If what is seen and experienced is portrayed in the language of logic, then it is science. If it is communicated through forms whose constructions are not accessible to the conscious mind but are recognized intuitively, then it is art``

>>7212811
That's like asking why a lawyer sucks at playing professional tennis OP.

i.e fucking stupid

>>7213118
No objective quality. No objective point. An essential part of culture, in fact, a major part of every human culture in history. Here's some help: think of "art" as "the thingy people like to make and share with people" instead of just "the thingy people like to look at."

If you'd like a more in-depth discussion of this issue, there's a great one in the David Graeber book "Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: the False Coin of Our Dreams"

>>7213130
>Objective truth have to be validated through reason.
Reason isn't objective and cannot validate "objective truths".

Read some post structuralism.

>>7213047
"Subjective" truth is objective in context.

>>7213236
>Read some post structuralism

u trollin?

not always though
and there is an equal number of artists who are idiots too

>>7212811
Because they are like greasy chinamen. They cannot see nor appreciate beauty, they only see beads to be counted on an abacus.

>>7212962
observation is a fundamental artistic skill

>>7212970
But he's evaluating it as a work of scientific accuracy, not as a work of art.

>>7212863
ohohohoh woooow

>like we're simply stardust, tha's poetic
That's poetic if your reading lists solely consists of Dawkins and Hawking, if you listen to easy-listening cool jazz while drinking fruit punch out of a wine glass, wearing a synthetic electric blue shirt beneath a jacket purchased at Walmart, mutely wording "m'lady" on your kissless lips; then yes, in that case, it is indeed poetic.

>Science is more artistic than any other form of artistic expression i can think of.
That's because your sorry uneducated mind cannot think of anything at all but facts and brute concepts.

You think you got stars in your eyes but all you have is a fedora on your head and IFLS on your Facebook.

>>7212811

Because they're autistic when it comes to imagination and creativity. No matter what it is, they'll take it in a literal sense and correct it, even if it doesn't require correcting.

>>7212811
My girlfriend had to read that book for some retarded English class, I peeked at it; this is the subzero level of literature, the basest form of human expression, Homer would not have considered the man who wrote this filth as part of those possessing language; the whole of this is literally "Heck no! The water is leaking. No! Who is phone??6? Come rescue me!"

Perfect role for Matt Damon

>>7213007
It's okay to be a retarded humanities loser m8. I'm sure you can be poetic about that burger flipping without needing to know any chemistry.

>>7214823
He'll still fuck your girlfriend though.

99% of people (well, Americans) are plebs when it comes to art. Scientist or English major, doesn't really matter. Most people just don't care beyond a "good" plot.

Science is the highest form of art. You are too plebian to understand.

>>7214861
No, art is the highest form of science.

>>7214839
>implying I'm not fucking his dad

>>7214869
Form is the highest science of art.

>>7212863
well memed

>>7214823
>im a chemist! I make money by producing noxious chemicals that fundamentally damage both the environment and people's individual health.

>>7214926
>implying lsd isn't the greatest gift to mankind

>>7214948
>implying it isn't the ability for conscious thought.

Nice try, druggie.

>>7214926
>I don't understand chemistry or green chemistry in the slightest and am just going to shitpost angrily
your humanities tears are delicious m8

>>7214964
>green chemistry
lmao, how much money you think there is in green chem, lad?

smh tbh, fam

>>7212917
>who are all cool enlightened socialist scientists who read Kim Stanley Robinson
This is the most reddit thing I've ever read. Not even reddit is this reddit.

>>7212842
>"pull yourself up by your bootstraps" morality nonsense
this
there is no, say, existential reflection of the martian or even basic inquiry into his psychological condition
being isolated on another planet is basically meaningless beyond the immediate "need to survive" which he goes about with a big goofy smile on his face

>>7212894
I don't think this is true. Good artists spend their entire life trying to make art while scientists spend their life trying to learn more about whatever they decided to learn about. They're practicing different things and usually don't have time for both.

A lot of people were talking about art in science and I think there can be, but it depends on what you mean by art. I think you could argue that there's some kind of aesthetic behind the Von Richter Reaction's mechanism.

>>7214926
Chemists are the ones who design your toothpaste and plasitcs. They create ways to make buildings stronger, and they have created every drug and chemotherapy that you'll use to heal yourself at one point in your life.

>>7212876
>poetic nature of existence

Get out here faggot.

I don't know shit about art, but... what's wrong with appreciating nature (as a broad, multi-faceted reality) through our own knowledge and imagination? this is something all scientists and engineers do

Science is about the things we can talk about, art is about the rest

>>7215073
This is not art, though; this is a retard making a mess on a canvas.

>>7215081
this is beautyful

>post yfw there are literal marxists on lit

>>7215081
Come on pleb, if you're gonna use a trip make sure you don't say dumb shit thatll one day come back to haunt you

>>7215081
Nice semicolon. *smiles condescendingly*

>>7212932
Dude, I've seen them cheer with delight when news broke about Japan requesting colleges to get rid of their social science majors. This is especially true for CompSci and Software Engineering, for god knows what reason.

>>7215081
This is the best post on 4chan right now

>>7215081
I'm telling all my /mu/ pals about this.

>>7215081
>not appreciating the juxtaposition of similar yet different forms
GET A LOAD OF THIS PLEB

>>7215126
literally?

>>7215126
I'm convinced most of them are the stemfags. I just can't see how they can appreciate art.

>>7215160
fucking original m8

>>7215150
I love art and am a film major but I cheered when that happened. You know why? Because state schools are no longer using tax-payer dollars to fund gender studies programs. That's why

>>7215160
wow, truly amazing. changes my world view. i can't handle that artistry

>>7215170
>>7215173
NIHIL SUB SOLE NOVUM
ALL ARTISTS STAND ON THE SHOULDER OF GIANTS, THERE IS NO ORIGINALITY IN THE WORLD
ALSO ALL CAPS SHOULD BE A CLEAR INDICATOR OF SARCASM YOU BUNCH OF DUMBFUCKS

>>7215081
>a retard
>Matisse

Heh

You can dislike Matisse's cut outs all you wish, certainly you wouldn't be the first to do so, considering temporaries described him as senile at that point. But in retrospect, his cut outs are so influential on design and aesthetics it's ridiculous. It was era defining, and they still keep incorporating them into modern, minimalist, flat, abstract designs and they don't even care and call this design current. You have to be blind not to see that.

>>7215211
matisse's cutouts are retarded. whether or not he was one is irrelevant. he probably was

Gene Wolfe was an engineer for a long time before he became a full time writer

>>7215224
evident by the autism that permeates his work

>>7213101
Not him, but resident favorite sci-fi author Gene Wolfe is an engineer (for just one example)

>>7214823
I make more money as an actuarian than you will ever. Stay mad, retard.

>>7215514
I get more pussy as a gigolo than you ever will. Stay mad, nerd.

>>7213101
Gene Wolfe
Asimov
Arthur Clarke
Vonnegut
Steinbeck
Lewis Carrol
C.P.Snow
Homer Hickam
Goethe
Percy Bysshe Shelley
H G Wells
Dostoevsky

the list could go on....

>>7212811

If you think scientists are art plebs you should spend 5 minutes in a conversation with an engineer.

Lame bait thread.

Oppenheimer made his own translation of the Bhagavad Gita. Walter Gilbert runs his own photography center now. Stephen Jay Gould was into classical music and sang in choirs. Harold Edgerton's hobby was photography.

In fact, Nobel Prize winners are three times as likely to have an artistic hobby compared to a regular person: http://priceonomics.com/the-correlation-between-arts-and-crafts-and-a/

>>7216138

Steinbeck studied English Literature at Stanford for 6 years before dropping out to pursue the literary life.

>>7216383

Because smart people generally try multiple things

Fuck, I think it was even Oppenheimer who suggested the Trinity name after reading Donne

there are plenty of non-stem people who enjoy pleb shit like the martian. one must also keep in mind that the author of the martian was a software 'engineer', relevant since software is the gayest area of stem and engineers are the gayest of all stem workers.

Guy who said this is a bait thread is right. A lot of STEM types actually cultivate interests in art. Some great novelists are great novelists because of their scientific training, at least partly. JG Ballard, Primo Levi anyone?

>>7214779
cool, so using science as a verb is scientifically accurate?

>>7216403

* smart STEM types

Maybe it's because I'm only really aquainted with pure Mathematics and Computer Science students, but it is a bit rare to find one with a modicum of taste. Best I've found so far has a crush on Camus and Pynchon and loves Allen Ginsberg. I think he's salvageable and smart though so I'm going to push him over to cooler stuff like Hart Crane and George Herbert and Hopkins.

Funny enough, were both double majors in English/Mathematics-CS. I wonder if he browses this shithole

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mc5z4LIsqE

Reminder

>>7216417
>Shitty flat character from a terrible TV show meets scientist long past his prime, trying to hang on for scraps of attention

Reminder about what?

>>7216417

Holy shit that was bad

>>7216415
I've discussed Céline, Verlaine, Al-Ghazali and Gongorra with maths students (and on a daily basis). You just live in a shit place m8.

>>7212811
pynchon tbh

Le nerd meme Reddit shit

>>7212842
except without the help of literally the entire world the guy would have died so i dont know what you are talking about

Probably because their profession is science and not art.

Why are artists such bad scientists?

>>7212842
The epilogue he gives at the end is embarrassing. He understands nothing about humans and attempts to pretend he does lmao.

What's /lit/'s version of /tv/'s "flick" does anyone know? Whatever it is, this book fits in well with that.

>>7212970
>my favourite line is "I'm going to have to science the shit out of this" hehehe

Good fucking god

>>7215073
Do people honestly try to pretend this is art

I feel like people spend more time criticizing the presumed fanbase of this book than criticizing the book. It's like the idea of enjoying or critiquing something based solely upon the work itself is anathema for some of you uppity cunts.

>>7216407
Science has nothing to say about the correctness of grammar.

>>7218959
There was a really great critique of the book itself I saw a few weeks ago. It had extensive quotations from the book itself. I'm confident in saying it is a complete piece of shit based on those excerpts alone.

>>7212811
Is there any work where the science and literature complement each other?
I though Stoppards Arcadia was good.

>>7218586
Tell me why it isn't you little queer

>>7218551
"Genre fiction"?

>>7216366
What's your point? They're obviously brilliantly smart in their field, it's just common that they also are dilettantes.

>>7213002
They ate a fuck load of stories and cave paintings to get out of the Neolithic age.

>>7213103
>Are there truths that you can't express scientifically?
Yes, science as we practise it has inbuilt limitation that put things outside its scope. One example of something on the border is String theory.

>Are there truths that you can't express poetically?
Yes, some things can only be expressed with equations or algorithms.

>>7215244
>not liking based Wolfe
You are such a fag holy shit