The prob­lem of “the two cul­tures” is not, in fact, a prob­lem at all. There’s a rea­son that art and sci­ence are dis­tinct. They don’t just work in dif­fer­ent ways; they work on dif­fer­ent things. Sci­ence address­es exter­nal real­i­ty, which lies out­side our minds and makes itself avail­able for objec­tive obser­va­tion. The arts address our expe­ri­ence of the world; they tell us what real­i­ty feels like. That is why the chain of con­silience rup­tures as we make the leap from mate­r­i­al phe­nom­e­na to the phe­nom­e­na of art.

Jane Austen, Game The­o­rist’ by Michael Suk-Young Chwe Is a Joke | New Repub­lic

I need to learn more about the “dis­ci­ples of con­silience” and the “sci­ence stud­ies huck­sters” men­tioned here. Would these include Latour and co? I enjoyed the arti­cle and can get behind the thrust of it (human­is­tic knowl­edge has val­ue in and of itself) but at the same time I am not con­vinced art and sci­ence are dis­tinct to the extent that they do not and should not inter­act.

Published by

Kars Alfrink

Kars is a designer, researcher and educator focused on emerging technologies, social progress and the built environment.