Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
Re: art/science and definition
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]R. Moore
Wed, 30 Dec 1998 17:11:27 -0800 (PST)
Debi B-H has commented that one of the things that makes the teaching of
art and science so fascinating is the constant challenge that developments
in these fields make to the existing concepts and received wisdom that
compose them at any one time. It seems to me that this is one of the most
important ideas we should be conveying to our students. A
scientific or artistic field, an artform, a political system, a language,
and so on can change even while what it is to be any one of these things
can retain the heritage of beliefs and practices that brought it to its
present state. And, although changes sometimes requre redefinition, they
don't always do so. There were lots of changes in the evolotion of the
symphony before the basic definition of "symphony" had to be reworked.
But, at a certain point, holding onto the old definition becomes too
unweildy, too complicated and hedged with qualifications. And that's the
time to chuck it and fashion a new definition.