The Scientist, The Artist, Science and Art

When Pythagoras is forgotten, Homer will be remembered. This is no disrespect to Pythagoras or praise for Homer, but simply a reflection of their natures as scientist and artist. The scientist does not create, he discovers. Once Pythagoras has proved that the square of the hypotenuse equals the addition of the other sides squared, this knowledge becomes the property of everyone who can understand it. It does belong to Pythagoras, but to the nature of the universe itself. Pythagoras was merely the man who first understood this aspect of the universe.

Homer, meanwhile, has created something completely new. The Iliad was not a part of the universe for him to discover, but a new universe for him to create. Homer’s personality is stamped into it, and it belongs to him alone. Even if we forget who wrote The Iliad (and some may say this is already true), it does not matter. It is still the unique product of its author. Though readers may see new things in it, no-one may ever understand the art on the same level the artist does at the moment of creation. It is his alone. The ultimate proof is that if Pythagoras did not discover his theorem, someone else would, or at the very least could. No-one else could write The Iliad.

However, while The Artist is Eternal and The Scientist is Temporary, Art itself is Temporary while Science is Eternal. By science here, I mean not only maths and physics, but also biology, geography, economics and history, really any area in which the scientist discovers aspects of the universe in the attempt to find the complete truth. Science is the revealed nature of the universe. Even when we forget it, it still exists, waiting to be rediscovered. Scientists can do nothing to change science; it is eternal and indestructible.

Art, meanwhile, is fragile and temporary. It requires the artist to create it, and can easily be destroyed, like Mozart’s lost Concertos. Unlike Pythagoras’s theorem, these can never be rediscovered. Each work of art is unique, so much so it can be hard to define what art is at all. In some ways philosophers, engineers and generals are artists, at least when they work on unique and personal subjects rather than discovering efficient methods that future generations can use. Historical figures such as Robespierre could be either artist or scientist, depending on whether they are unique aberrations or the embodiments of their age. Art is anything fragile, unique and irreplaceable. When the human race and even the universe end, all art will die. But science will remain.

something i thought of while getting dressed this morning.
note: The Scientist and The Artist are 'he' only because the examples i used were male