Just as the science and art of agriculture depend upon chemistry and botany, so the art of education depends upon physiology and psychology.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
And if we must educate our poets and artists in science, we must educate our masters, labour and capital, in art.
For some years, I've been very interested in the relationship between science and art.
I would say the connection between art and science is very tenuous for me. It's just that I'm interested in both. I don't think that my interest in art affects the kind of science that I do.
The arts, sciences, humanities, physical education, languages and maths all have equal and central contributions to make to a student's education.
Indeed, I would feel that an appreciation of the arts in a conscious, disciplined way might help one to do science better.
I think an education is beneficial, but whether it takes an education to be successful in the arts is a whole other question.
Nature has always had more force than education.
Nature engenders the science of painting.
The difference between science and the arts is not that they are different sides of the same coin even, or even different parts of the same continuum, but rather, they are manifestations of the same thing. The arts and sciences are avatars of human creativity.
Cooking and gardening involve so many disciplines: math, chemistry, reading, history.