Science and art. Science and art are forms of social consciousness and specific ways of reflecting the universe. However, there are significant differences between them. If science. What do science and art have in common?

1. concept of art. difference between art and science

Art is one of the most important spheres of culture, and unlike other spheres of activity (occupation, profession, position, etc.) it is universally significant, without it it is impossible to imagine people’s lives. The beginnings of artistic activity are noted in primitive society, long before the advent of science and philosophy. And despite the antiquity of art, its irreplaceable role in human life, the long history of aesthetics, the problem of the essence and specificity of art still remains largely unresolved. What is the secret of art and why is it difficult to give a strictly scientific definition of it? The point is, first of all, that art does not lend itself to logical formalization; attempts to identify its abstract essence always ended in either approximation or failure.

First, obviously, it is necessary to determine what meaning is implied in the word “art” itself. We can distinguish three different meanings of this word, closely related to each other, but differing in scope and content.

In the broadest sense, the concept of “art” (and this, apparently, is its most ancient application) means any skill, skillfully, technically performed activity, the result of which is artificial in comparison with the natural. It is this meaning that follows from the ancient Greek word “techne” - art, skill.

The second, narrower meaning of the word “art” is creativity according to the laws of beauty. Such creativity refers to a wide range of activities: the creation of useful things, machines, this should also include the design and organization of public and personal life, the culture of everyday behavior, communication between people, etc. Nowadays, creativity functions successfully according to the laws of beauty in various areas of design .

A special type of social activity is artistic creativity itself, the products of which are special spiritual aesthetic values ​​- this is the third and narrowest meaning of the word “art”. This will be the subject of further consideration.

Not a single form of art - painting, music, literature, cinema, etc. - can exist without material embodiment. Painting is unthinkable without paints and other materials, music without the sounds of instruments and voices. But it is clear that painting is not reducible to paints, literature to paper and letters, and sculpture is not simply shaped bronze or marble. In artistic creativity, material is only a means for expressing the spiritual content of works.

But where does this content come from? When it comes to art, its creative nature always comes to the fore, since the artist does not mirror reality, but composes, “invents” the content of the work from his spiritual world. It is no coincidence that there is an opinion that artistic creativity is the artist’s self-expression.

However, the most important question in understanding creativity is what self-expression is meaningfully based on. Not a single artist can “invent” anything if his spiritual world does not somehow contain experience, knowledge, and understanding of the surrounding reality. To think otherwise is to recognize brush-and-paint experiments by monkeys or computer-produced “virtual realities” as works of art.

The most daring imagination is based on the acquired spiritual wealth of the artist, who, using his imagination, can create incredible combinations, but... phenomena of real life! Remember the works of S. Dali, P. Picasso. It was based on an understanding of this specific feature of the imagination that Leonardo da Vinci gave advice to an artist drawing “... a fictional animal - let it be, say, a snake - then take for its head the head of a shepherd or a pointer dog, add cat’s eyes to it, the ears of an eagle owl, the nose of a greyhound, the eyebrows of a lion, the temples of an old rooster and the neck of a water turtle.”

In principle, both in theoretical and artistic knowledge, reflection and self-expression of the author are dialectically connected. With some degree of convention, the following comparison can be made: in science - from reality to hypothesis and through experiment or speculation (logical reasoning, conjecture) to the truth; in art - from reality to design and through fiction and subject-conventional imagery to artistic truth. In epistemological terms, a certain closeness between science and art can be seen.

But what distinguishes artistic knowledge from theoretical knowledge, why can science never replace art? Let us dwell on some points of view regarding the specifics of art.

1. The founder of aesthetics, Baumgarten, believed that the object of logical knowledge is truth, and the object of aesthetic knowledge is beauty; the highest beauty is realized in nature and therefore imitation of natural beauty is the highest task of art. This point of view, which is consistent with the Aristotelian understanding of art, has been generally accepted for a long time.

However, it cannot be considered completely satisfactory for a number of reasons. Firstly, beauty here is reduced only to the sensually perceived, and secondly, not only the beauty of nature is reflected in art, and indeed it is not nature as such that is the object of art.

2. N. G. Chernyshevsky more clearly noted the specificity of art in comparison with science: science gives “impartial” knowledge, while art makes a “sentence” on life. Indeed, the scientist’s worries and experiences during the research process are eliminated in its results. But the conclusions of science in their social significance are by no means “impartial” - for example, ecology and sociology also contain certain “sentences” of reality.

3. The so-called “axiological” point of view, which is now widespread, is adjacent to the judgments of N. G. Chernyshevsky: “Without denying the cognitive function of art, we see the specificity of artistic cognition in the operation of values. This is its main difference from science, which deals with truths” (Berkhin N.V. Specificity of art. - M., 1984. - P. 24-25). However, the value attitude cannot be excluded from scientific activity; truth itself is a value. Another thing is - what values ​​​​and the value of what is science or art concerned with?

4. L. N. Tolstoy in his voluminous article “What is art?” analyzes more than three dozen different approaches to defining the specifics of art and does not find a single one that satisfies him. The writer himself puts forward his judgment: “The sign that distinguishes real art... is one undoubted one - the contagiousness of art” (L.N. Tolstoy on literature. - M., 1955. - P. 458). This refers to the emotional impact that art certainly has. However, sports competitions and various kinds of games that are far from artistic creativity also have “contagiousness” and the ability to emotionally excite.

5. The most widespread, traditional and, one might say, generally accepted point of view is that the specificity of art, in contrast to science, is that it reflects reality in the form of artistic images, and science - in the form of abstract concepts: “The difference between a scientific concept and an artistic image allows us to identify a specific feature of art...” (Aesthetic consciousness and the process of its formation. - M., 1981. - P. 7). “Only an artistic image as a special way of reflecting life in art will help us determine the specifics of the latter...” (Kiyaschenko N.I., Leizerov N.L. Theory of reflection and problems of aesthetics. - M., 1983. - P. 6; see also: Besklubenko S, D. The nature of art. - M., 1982. - P. 98; Gulyga A. V. Principles of aesthetics. - M., 1987. - P. 215, etc.). This point of view is carried out in all textbooks and manuals on aesthetics (see: Marxist-Leninist aesthetics. - M., 1983. P. 159; Aesthetics. - Kyiv, 1991. P. 83). Correctly noting one of the indicative, so to speak, “technical” differences between art and science, supporters of this, as well as other points of view, present the consequence of the specificity of art as its cause.

The question naturally arises: why does art reflect life in the form or method of artistic images, and science in abstract concepts? To correctly answer this question, one must remember the immutable truth: the form, the method of reflection is determined primarily by what is reflected. The difference, for example, between chemistry and botany is not that the first describes the world through formulas, and the second in a different form, but that in one case chemical phenomena and processes are known, and in the other, the plant world. Sociology and economic theory use approximately the same methods of research and description, but they are different sciences, since each has its own object of study.

In order to reveal the real basis of the specificity of art, it is necessary to identify for it a specific object of reflection, which ultimately determines the social necessity, the irreplaceability of art, and all the features of the method and form of reflection of life. Art is not only a specific reflection of reality, but, and this is very important, a reflection of what is specific in reality. Obviously, this can be shown most clearly by comparing the objects reflected in science and art.

Any reflection, theoretical or artistic, in principle begins with an appeal to specific manifestations of reality, to real facts. But immediate existence, living facts are for science only the initial condition for comprehending essence as a specific object of theoretical knowledge. The merciless blade of scientific penetration into reality cuts through immediate existence, separating the random, individual, external appearance. Meanwhile, no less interesting for people is the reflection and reproduction of all the richness, all the vitality of the immediate existence of the real world. As N. G. Chernyshevsky noted, “... in life there are always these details that are not necessary for the essence of the matter, but necessary for its actual development; they should be in poetry too” (Chernyshevsky N.G. Selected works - P. 438).

The very task of science to isolate and crystallize the essence presupposes a certain “emasculation” of the picture of the world. Thanks to the invasion of scientific thought, the wealth of infinitely diverse nature is diminishing, its springs are fading and the iridescent colors are dimming. Living passions and actions of specific people, the fullness of attractive and wonderful, comic and tragic phenomena turn into abstract universalities. The goal of science to reflect reality in its universal connections leads to the fact that it does not stop at discovering the essence of one fact, but goes deeper into the sphere of essential relations expressed in laws.

The laws discovered by science are even “further away” from immediate existence in the sense of abstraction from living, moving reality. “The kingdom of laws is the calm content of the phenomenon; the phenomenon is the same content, but presented in a restless shift and as a reflection into something else” (Hegel G. Science of Logic. In 3 vols. T. 2.-M, 1970-1972-P. 140).

This is the destiny of science: its laws cannot contain a direct relationship between the past, present and future, for the laws reflect the “calm”, since quality, essence, law can be understood as moments of relative peace, isolated from the mass of moving phenomena and accidents of reality. Even when development is theoretically studied, its laws must be isolated, “torn off” from the living concrete dynamics of life and recorded in abstract categories.

Art is capable of reproducing the specific dynamics of life, the connection of times, and this ability is due to its specific object.

What is the difference between science and art, science and philosophy

The difference between art and science

Slide 2. In our age of rapid development of science and technology, all-encompassing media, it would seem difficult to surprise us with something new. And new things inexorably and noisily invade our lives every day. And yet the world is infinitely richer and more diverse than all the latest discoveries in science, technology, culture and art. This puts even modern science fiction writers in a difficult position. Paradoxical? But it is so. Paradoxes always express something unexpected, diverging from the established, generally accepted.

Slide 3. Cognition is primarily a human activity. It is he, the man, who masters and humanizes reality in all historically available ways. Man has created two truly powerful means of knowing nature and himself - science and art.

Slide 4. Art arose before science; it initially absorbed all forms of human knowledge. Why did they subsequently split? The answer to this question must be sought in the study of the very history of human knowledge. History itself is nothing more than the activity of a person pursuing his own goals. It was not history, it was man, a real, living man who mastered, inhabited the earthly world, drew all his knowledge, sensations, and so on from the sensory world and the experience received from this world. He strove to arrange the world around him in such a way that a person in it would cognize and assimilate what is truly human, so that he would recognize himself as a human being.

Rivals or allies?

Slide 5. The invention of the steam locomotive, the automobile and the airplane, cinema and radio did not revolutionize people's psychology or their worldview. New discoveries in science and technology are incomparable to previous ones.

Slide 6. Science and technology cannot but influence people's worldview and, consequently, their psychology. And yet, is there mutual influence between art and science? Yes, science and art not only undoubtedly influence each other, but also compete in discoveries: the first - in the field of the secrets of nature, the second - in the human soul.

Slide 7. The world of science itself can be one of many objects to which art addresses itself. Science can move Mount Everest, but it cannot make the human heart a little kinder. Only art can do this; moreover, this is its main, eternal goal.

Slide 8. Art is a grandiose building, but a separate work is a microscopic building, but complete. In science, not a single study is completed; it has meaning and value among its predecessors and successors. If science is likened to a grandiose building, then individual research is a brick in its wall. Therefore, art has been accumulating values ​​for centuries, weeding out the weak, but preserving the great, and it has been exciting listeners and viewers for hundreds and thousands of years.

Science has a more direct path: the thoughts of each researcher, the facts he has obtained, are a piece of the path traveled. There is no road without this meter of asphalt, but it has been passed, the road goes on, hence the lifespan of a scientific work is so short, something like 30-50 years. Such is the fate of the books and works of the brilliant physicists Newton, Maxwell, and even Einstein, who is very close to us. And scientists advise getting acquainted with the works of geniuses according to the accounts of their contemporaries, since time trims a brilliant discovery, gives it a new form, even changes its features. In this we must look for the source of psychological differences between scientific and artistic creativity.

Slide 9. But the scientist also sees one area where science and art intersect. This is something that did not exist in the past, that has appeared in recent decades. This area is the rules of human behavior. In the last century, only art was the bearer of moral values. In our century, science shares with art, this is the time. Modern views on the structure of the Universe and the nature of man himself raise harsh conclusions about the responsibility of people for all life on earth. Art also leads to the same conclusions, but it is less about proof and more about emotional display. And the scientist sees the most remarkable and unique feature of art in the fact that art can make us live thousands of other people’s lives. This does not mean that art is the area of ​​only human emotions; the author cannot agree with the opinion that rationalism unites and dries a person. The physicist does not see any competition between art and science; their goal is the same - to make people happy.

What explains the decline in the prestige of art and the danger of its transformation into an adornment of life? Art, which for many centuries had only one rival in the struggle for man - religion, now has a new rival, which has grown imperceptibly and presented itself as at least an equal before the astonished gaze of artists accustomed to looking at science arrogantly and with disdain. Now literature and art can fulfill their high purpose only then; when they comprehend and understand the vast spiritual world of science, if they focus on the same high level that young people seek and so often find in science. The main pathos is that everything is aimed at a radical change in the attitude of art to the huge world of people of science, full of quests and exploits, to their creativity, to their thoughts, passions, sufferings and joys.

In the last century, when science, and after it technology, dealt with more or less publicly accessible things, writers and artists could well give scientists fruitful ideas. Now the front of research, at least in the most developed sciences, has gone deep into such jungle that it is difficult to do this. It is true that the direct transmission of ideas is the simplest form of influence on science. If we want to understand the real possibilities of art in this regard, we must study this issue more deeply.

No one can deny the impact of the scientific and technological revolution on all spheres of our lives - it is so obvious. But paradoxically, the impact of modern and not only modern science and technology on artistic creativity has been discussed for many years in the special mass press. During the discussion, both fruitful and contradictory, and often directly opposite, points of view are expressed. They are very instructive. The scientific and technological revolution is the invasion of the future into the present, making today's organization of tomorrow a practical necessity, and on a worldwide scale. We are talking here about the unprecedented development of science and technology, means of communication, information, and the growth of the world's population. The quantity and levels of all factors have reached such values ​​that they cannot exist in the same quality, under the same conditions. And the point here is not evolution, but spontaneous development, it’s not only about the relationships between people of different social classes and different countries, but also about the relationships between all people with the whole world, animate and inanimate, existing by nature and created by people during their time existence.

In the past, literature was not very far behind the phenomena of technological progress. How are things going today? Nowadays, science and technology in their impact on a person, his psychology and attitude are superior to his traditional types of artistic creativity.

In art, as in science, the most life-giving tradition is eternal searches, experiments, and the desire for analysis and synthesis. Science teaches us to take a new, much more subtle look not only at the structure of matter, but also at art itself. And, finally, the most important thing: the means and purposes of science and art are different, but there is a connection between them. Like two parallels, they coordinate with each other and rush towards the future, as if complementing each other, helping to improve the artistic and scientific method. As aptly put, atomic physics, new mathematics, cybernetics, cosmogony, computer science and the Internet need more courage in imagination and dreams. Art needs knowledge and deep thought.

Slide 10. The eternal dispute between science and art... Let's listen to the wise words of Goethe: “They say that between two opposing opinions lies the Truth. In no case! There is a problem between them.”

Thus, to get closer to the Truth means to explore the problem in its real, historical development.

Science and Philosophy: Similarities and Differences

Slide 11. The word “philosophy” comes from two Greek words “philo” - love and “sophia” - wisdom, so in general we get “love of wisdom”.

Philosophical knowledge is often defined as scientific knowledge. However, there are a number of differences between philosophy and science that have forced many thinkers to question the identification of science and philosophy.

Firstly, philosophy, like science, is the primary human activity in the sphere of thinking. Philosophy does not specifically set itself the task of testing aesthetic feelings, as art does, or moral actions, as religion and morality require. Although philosophy can talk about both art and religion, it is primarily reasoning, thinking about all these subjects.

Slide 12. Is philosophy a science? There has been and, apparently, will be a lot of debate about the relationship between philosophy and private sciences; some define philosophy as a science, others as a special type of worldview, others as their symbiosis, etc. “Philosophy can be defined as the doctrine of the general principles of existence, knowledge and human relations to the world.” In another: “Philosophy is the doctrine of the world as a whole, of the general principles and laws of its existence and knowledge.” It is difficult to give an unambiguous answer to this question, since modern science is extremely complex.The first thing to start with is to clarify the essence of this social phenomenon, the definition of the very concept of the term “Philosophy and Science”.

Slide 13. Science is a form of spiritual activity of people aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society and knowledge itself, with the immediate goal of comprehending the truth and discovering objective laws based on a generalization of real facts in their interrelation.

Science is both a creative activity to obtain new knowledge and the result of such activity: a body of knowledge brought into an integral system based on certain principles and the process of their production. Like other forms of knowledge, science is a socio-historical activity, and not just “pure knowledge”. The features of scientific activity are universality, uniqueness, discipline, and democracy.

Philosophy (in translation from Greek, language) - “love of wisdom.” Despite its considerable age (philosophy arose about 2500 years ago), there is still no unambiguous interpretation of this concept. Philosophy acts as a thinking tool; it develops principles, categories, and methods of cognition that are actively used in specific sciences.

Slide 14. Similarities. Philosophy is a science. Concrete science, as a certain type of empirical and theoretical knowledge of reality, deals with certain concepts, judgments, conclusions, principles, laws, hypotheses, theories. In philosophy, as in any science, people make mistakes, are mistaken, put forward hypotheses that may turn out to be untenable, etc. But all this does not mean that philosophy is one of the sciences among other sciences. Philosophy has a different subject - it is the science of the universal, no other science deals with this.

Philosophy and Science are two interrelated activities aimed at studying the world and the people living in this world. Philosophy strives to know everything: visible and invisible, perceived by human senses and not, real and unreal. There are no boundaries for Philosophy - it strives to understand everything, even the illusory. Science studies only what can be seen, touched, weighed, etc.

Slide 15. What are the differences between philosophy and science? The great German philosopher A. Schopenhauer, “a philosopher should never forget that philosophy is an art, not a science.” Hegel believed that, unlike other sciences, “philosophy wants to cognize the unchangeable eternal, the “existent” in itself,” its goal is truth.”

Slide 16. P.V. Alekseev and A.V. Panin wrote in their textbook “The subject of philosophy is the universal in the world-man system.” Philosophy is the science of the world as a whole and of man’s relationship to this world.”

Slide 17. So, science and philosophy are not the same thing, although they have a lot in common.

What philosophy and science have in common is that they:

1. They strive to develop rational knowledge;

2. Focused on establishing the laws and patterns of the objects and phenomena being studied.

Slide 18. The difference is that:

1. Philosophy is always presented in a targeted manner, i.e. by one philosopher or another, when his ideas and works can be self-sufficient and not depend on whether other philosophers share them or not. Science is ultimately the fruit of collective labor;

2. Philosophy cannot give an accurate forecast, i.e. cannot extrapolate reliable knowledge into the future, because it does not possess it. An individual philosopher, based on a certain system of views, can only predict, but not predict or model, as is possible for a scientist. What is the difference between science and art, science and philosophy Prepared by Vladimirova N.Yu.

The difference between art and science New Paradox

Cognition is a human activity

Rivals or allies?

New discoveries in science and technology are incomparable with previous ones!

Science and Art of Discovery

Science and art

Science and art 30-50 years

They have one goal - to make people happy!!!

“They say that between two opposing opinions lies the Truth. In no case! There is a problem between them.”

Science and Philosophy: Similarities and Differences

Is philosophy a science?

Philosophy is a special form of social consciousness and knowledge of the world, developing a system of knowledge about the fundamental principles and foundations of human existence, about the most general essential characteristics of human relations to nature, society and spiritual life in all their main manifestations. Science is a form of spiritual activity of people aimed at producing knowledge about nature, society and knowledge itself, with the immediate goal of comprehending the truth and discovering objective laws based on a generalization of real facts in their interrelation. The features of scientific activity are universality, uniqueness, discipline, and democracy. Acting as a thinking tool, it develops principles, categories, and methods of cognition that are actively used in specific sciences.

Similarities Deals with certain concepts, judgments, conclusions, principles, laws, hypotheses, theories. Errors, misconceptions, hypotheses. Exploring the world and the people living in this world. Strives to understand everything, even illusory things. It studies only what can be seen, touched, weighed, etc.

What are the differences between philosophy and science? “...a philosopher should never forget that philosophy is an art, not a science.” “philosophy wants to cognize the unchangeable eternal, the “existent” in itself, its goal is truth.”

What are the differences between philosophy and science? P.V. Alekseev and A.V. Panin wrote in their textbook “The subject of philosophy is the universal in the world-man system.”

They strive to develop rational knowledge (knowledge of the surrounding world through natural perception and mental activity). 2. Focused on establishing the laws and patterns of the objects and phenomena being studied. Commonalities between philosophy and science

Philosophy is always presented in a targeted manner, i.e. by one philosopher or another, when his ideas and works can be self-sufficient and not depend on whether other philosophers share them or not. Science is ultimately the fruit of collective labor; Philosophy cannot give an accurate forecast, i.e. cannot extrapolate reliable knowledge into the future, because it does not possess it. An individual philosopher, based on a certain system of views, can only predict, but not predict or model, as is possible for a scientist. Miscellaneous

Thank you for your attention!

Art and science are universally significant categories, without which it is impossible to imagine our lives. Both contribute to a person’s better knowledge of the world and himself. But the patterns of existence in each case can be distinguished differently.

Definition

Art– embodiment of the phenomena of reality in an artistic image. When creating a work, the creator tries to express how he sees the world around him, as well as talk about his impressions and experiences. What comes out as a result is close to other people and important to them. Types of art are, for example, sculpture, painting, choreography.

The science is engaged in obtaining and systematizing knowledge about the world around us. People of science are scientists and researchers who work in different areas of life. Their activities can have both theoretical and practical orientation.

Comparison

The criterion is that art is addressed to the sensory side of human perception. It provides the author with the opportunity to express his moods, demonstrate his individuality and creativity. The artist is guided by inspiration. What is important to him is the excitement of the soul, pleasure, anticipation, and not strict boundaries and norms.

A product of art is a unique work of figurative nature. In terms of craftsmanship, it is at the highest level. The artistic power of this work is such that it makes people who perceive it experience strong emotions and rethink their lives. The difference between art and science is that it appeals to the heart.

Science is characterized by rigor and objectivity. It forms knowledge about reality, which takes the form of axioms, formulas, and descriptions of phenomena. Scientific knowledge is always reliable, since everything studied goes through critical analysis and is confirmed by facts and experiments. Science relies on logic, leaving feelings and emotions behind.

The very purposes of existence of both are different. If for art it is important to express the aesthetic ideal and direct people’s mentality towards good, then science is driven by the idea of ​​identifying existing patterns. Art reflects both the typical and the individual. Generalization dominates in science.

Art is historically specific and changeable. Its values ​​and ideals are dependent on the spirit of the current era. Art shows life in its dynamics. Science is static. Its conclusions and laws do not change, no matter what happens around. And even when any development is studied, the identified patterns are recorded in constant abstract categories.

What is the difference between art and science? The fact is that masterpieces of art are not created from textbooks. They represent a kind of mystery and are capable of delivering aesthetic pleasure to the audience. Moreover, everyone’s understanding of such works is different. Scientific knowledge, in turn, is not for pleasure. They are the same for everyone and are always understood unambiguously.

Science and art are forms of social consciousness and specific ways of reflecting the universe. However, there are significant differences between them. If science is aimed at objective reflection of the world in conceptual forms , then art is a form of social consciousness that, with the help of artistic images provides a translation of human experience.

The difference between science and art is that science is the area of ​​theoretical thinking, and art is the area of ​​artistic thinking. A scientist thinks in abstractions, a poet thinks in artistic images. First proves and explains , second shows and describes . In art, the main thing is the emotional contact of the author with the reader, listener, and viewer. An artistic image affects, first of all, their feelings and through this influence encourages them to think (and even then not always). In science, the scientist turns to the mind of the reader or listener, trying to carry him along mainly with the help of logic, and emotional means can only play a supporting role.

Art, unlike science, expresses the personal meanings of life for both an individual and a generation. Unlike science, which is aimed at searching general patterns , art pays attention to everyone isolated case and event, each individual human life.

If generalization dominates in science, then in art individualization and typification, which is contained in artistic images, are important. Art is addressed not to the rational-rational, but to the sensory-associative and emotional structure of human perception. What is important for art is the visual embodiment of the ideal of beauty and an artistically truthful attitude towards the world. Hence the polarity in values, assessments and categories of artistic consciousness.

Thus, if for science the idea of ​​regularity acts as a regulator, then for art it turns out to be an aesthetic ideal. Important in science search for a pattern , in art - expression of an ideal in the perception of the world.

Another distinctive feature is related to the role of the word. If scientific activity requires articulation and setting the goals and objectives of scientific research, then the specificity of artistic search and reflection of reality allows for non-articulation, i.e. the realm of what cannot be expressed in words, but what is perceived by the soul.

Art includes sign systems of various types of art, but is not limited to them. Art cannot be learned from a textbook; it embodies creative inspiration and abilities, and contains personal meanings.

In addition to denoting a multifaceted sphere of creative activity, the concept of “art” also means skill, the ability of a particular subject. Art constructs a specific world in relation to empirical reality.

Art is subject to historical changes, depends on the spirit of the era, as well as on the abilities of a particular subject - the creator, on the characteristics of his spiritual and creative manner and style, his thinking and mentality. Art can make the spiritual world of science and scientists the subject of artistic reflection. It is no coincidence that art is called a kind of encyclopedia of humanity. At the same time, science can set the task of penetrating human genius, intuition, and revealing the secret of human abilities and talent.

The artistic vision of the world cannot be presented as purely rational. It is art that shows how much the reflection of reality depends on the way it is perceived.

Thus, science and art, being different forms of spiritual creativity, nevertheless partially overlap with each other.

Science and art are forms of social consciousness and specific ways of reflecting the universe. However, there are significant differences between them. If science is aimed at objective reflection of the world in conceptual forms , then art is a form of social consciousness that, with the help artistic images provides a translation of human experience.

The difference between science and art is essentially that science is the area of ​​theoretical thinking, and art is the area of ​​artistic thinking. A scientist thinks in abstractions, a poet thinks in artistic images. First proves and explains , second shows and describes . In art, the main thing is the emotional contact of the author with the reader, listener, and viewer. An artistic image affects, first of all, their feelings and through this influence encourages them to think (and even then not always). In science, the scientist turns to the mind of the reader or listener, trying to carry him along mainly with the help of logic, and emotional means can only play a supporting role.

Art, unlike science, expresses the personal meanings of life for both an individual and a generation. Unlike science, which is aimed at searching general patterns , art pays attention to everyone isolated case and event, each individual human life.

If generalization dominates in science, then in art individualization and typification, which is contained in artistic images, are important. Art is addressed not to the rational-rational, but to the sensory-associative and emotional structure of human perception. What is important for art is the visual embodiment of the ideal of beauty and an artistically truthful attitude towards the world. Hence the polarity in values, assessments and categories of artistic consciousness.

However, if for science the idea of ​​regularity is the regulative, then for art it turns out to be an aesthetic ideal. Important in science search for a pattern , in art - expression of an ideal in the perception of the world.

Another distinctive feature is related to the role of the word. If scientific activity requires articulation and formulation of the goals and objectives of scientific research, then the specificity of artistic search and reflection of reality allows for non-articulation, ᴛ.ᴇ. the realm of what cannot be expressed in words, but what is perceived by the soul.

Art includes sign systems of various types of art, but is not limited to them. Art cannot be learned from a textbook; it embodies creative inspiration and abilities, and contains personal meanings.

In addition to denoting a multifaceted sphere of creative activity, the concept of “art” also means skill, the ability of a particular subject. Art constructs a specific world in relation to empirical reality.

Art is subject to historical changes, based on the spirit of the era, as well as on the abilities of a particular subject - the creator, on the characteristics of his spiritual and creative manner and style, his thinking and mentality. Art can make the spiritual world of science and scientists the subject of artistic reflection. It is no coincidence that art is called a kind of encyclopedia of humanity. At the same time, science can set the task of penetrating human genius, intuition, and revealing the secret of human abilities and talent.

The artistic vision of the world cannot be presented as purely rational. It is art that shows how much the reflection of reality depends on the way it is perceived.

However, science and art, being different forms of spiritual creativity, nevertheless partially overlap with each other.

Science and art - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Science and Art" 2017, 2018.