Art vs Science has been a big debate and many times purists make the discussion very emotional and one directional. We can say that it's an art to divert a conversation or a discussion to a particular direction or probably science.
Being in engineering field, I come across some activities where we tend to be scientific and overdo it to a level that value of the activity goes down w.r.t. the effort you put. Let me share a recent example where we were discussing the process to streamline interviews. This is a challenge when an organization wants to hire at a fast pace and there are few interviewers in the company. Now the question comes that how you build that skill quickly and ensure that interviewing process is aligned with company motives and goals. We started the discussion with building a question bank and then how we can have new people shadow existing interviewers and learn the process. The discussion kept going and at every step we were discussing how to make things objective. All sounds fine when I explain it in a paragraph but imagine an hour long discussion on interviewing process which is focussed on making thing mechanical. The topic of this post came to my mind in same meeting.
In my opinion, It's important to follow the scientific way of dealing with things but if there is no scope of experimentation and learning things in own way, we don't need humans for such things. We rather use computers to solve those problems. Unfortunately interviewing is also an art. It's not always about the right answer of a selected problem in an interview but more about how a candidate proceeds with a question, how s/he responds to the hints provided, how quickly or smartly s/he moves ahead and makes progress etc. In my opinion it's more of an art than a science, but at the same time it would be wrong to say that it's only an Art. To be a great interviewer you need to appreciate both the scientific & artistic skills to deal with it.
Now let's talk about Photography or Painting which come across as Art forms but to excel in these fields you need to be equally scientific to make good progress w.r.t. time you have. For example, a Photographer who doesn't clearly understand the capabilities of latest gadgets, cameras, lenses & imaging softwares, there is higher probability of slower speed in moving ahead. Practice makes an artist better at an art and science enables to accelerate that process of progressing ahead.
Same thing applies to a painter. If as a painter, you don't understand characteristics of different types of paints & colors and how they behave with different mediums like water, oil etc. And that's very primality. As you progress as an artist in terms of aesthetics, you need to observe scientific nuances as well. And both these aspects are difficult to define.
Wondering how it's related to Travel or Photography, especially about 'Travel'. Recall this thought while you are planning a travel or actually travelling. Is planning more about an art or science?
Now it's your turn. Think about the work you do and try to find out if it's purely about science or art. I would love to hear back your thoughts on this, so please leave your comments.
Same thing applies to a painter. If as a painter, you don't understand characteristics of different types of paints & colors and how they behave with different mediums like water, oil etc. And that's very primality. As you progress as an artist in terms of aesthetics, you need to observe scientific nuances as well. And both these aspects are difficult to define.
Wondering how it's related to Travel or Photography, especially about 'Travel'. Recall this thought while you are planning a travel or actually travelling. Is planning more about an art or science?
Now it's your turn. Think about the work you do and try to find out if it's purely about science or art. I would love to hear back your thoughts on this, so please leave your comments.
.jpg)