ISSUE III
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
8 SIENNA SOLSTICE<br />
<strong>ISSUE</strong> <strong>III</strong> 9<br />
To make such broad statements undermines and denies the uniqueness of each sport, and by extension,<br />
the different strengths that artists and scientists bring to bear on the questions they pursue.<br />
In science, when we talk about experiments, and when people talk about artists experimenting, the<br />
word “experiment” is used in very different ways, right?<br />
In science, the general idea is that you usually have some kind of theory. You have a hypothesis to test,<br />
and you design controlled experiments. Advances in science are incremental. The conclusions are<br />
provisional, and subject to change. You put [the findings] out there for other people to either replicate or<br />
disconfirm. The nice thing about that approach as a general model to advance knowledge is that the experiments<br />
and the data determine how you think about the world. At the end of the day, the data drives<br />
our thinking. Creativity for a scientist comes in figuring out the right question and then asking “How are<br />
you going to design a decent experiment?”<br />
So in my lab, one thing we repeat is, “The question is the question.” You can spend months figuring out<br />
what [the question] is. Which question is worth asking? Once you have some sense of that, you start<br />
trying to craft the best ways to address that question. There’s a lot of creativity that comes into those<br />
stages.<br />
Artists are not constrained by data. Their process, as I understand it, tends to be much more individual.<br />
Once they put their artwork out there, the core aspects of how science advances through replication<br />
and verification, don’t really apply—at least not in the same way.<br />
So, I think the process of most artists’ work is pretty personal, even when embedded in an institutional<br />
or cultural context. Experimental science doesn’t advance through individuals. It’s almost always<br />
conducted in teams. To conflate the practice of art and science as the same— just denies the unique<br />
strengths of each approach.<br />
antidisciplinary<br />
(adjective)<br />
• • •<br />
A rejection of the idea of the<br />
“interdisciplinary,” as<br />
disciplines are not only interconnected,<br />
but interdependent.<br />
Wherein no system of thought can contain the fullness of the human experience.<br />
How do you continue asking novel questions and experimenting in the field of neuroaesthetics?<br />
DR. CHATTERJEE: It’s really fun.<br />
For an investigator, it’s a gift to be in a field where fascinating issues are wide open. There are so many<br />
low hanging fruits to be addressed. I think if you’re a curious person, and your curiosity is a bit disciplined,<br />
novel questions become apparent. Another important aspect for a principal investigator to stay<br />
fresh—and this gets lost when people talk about how science advances—is to pick the right people<br />
and then not get in their way. Young scientists animate my thinking as much as I mentor them. Having<br />
young people who are excited about what they are doing at the start of their careers rejuvenates me.