This thread is well thought out and not shit.

no you are right

but in life everybody is either an artist or a scientist, think about it.

Scientists and Engineers are the most essential beings to society.

>>1055013
...and you are clearly retarded.

>>1055013
Great point anon. Would that mean that those who apply themsleves are the most important members of society?

>>1054999
artists were once relevant because those who were artists tended to be polymaths who studied everything. now hurrdurr everyone's an artist with no other important skills.

>>1055030
How is he retarded in any way?

>>1055020
>Created the atom bomb
>Created technology that is rapidly depleting the earth's resources
>Helpful

Human civillization was the worst thing humanity ever came up with and fuck anybody who says different.

>>1055064
then please rid yourself of civilization and become a hermit. better yet, an hero.

how about doctors

>>1055035
exactly, there are two types of people
artist and scientist, everybody thinks differently but it's always on both those spectrums

a better way to put it is
abstract thinkers (artist)
and
techincal thinkers (scientist)

Religious people would fall into the abstract thinking category. While your typical science / agnostic / atheist people would think more technically as far as their beliefs go.

left brain people and right brain people

>>1055064
OP here, I can agree with this when I think about it, but at the same time its only logical that humans would choose to create a society.

>>1055080
The doctors that do research into cures for diseases, and what not, can be considered scientists.

>>1054999

>The most essential beings in society are artists and scientists.

The most essential beings in society are food gatherers and farmers.

Agriculture is the basis of all modern technology.

>>1055080
Doctors=Scientists

>>1055098
Agriculture is a science.

Society is a machine. If you take away one gear, no matter how small and insignificant, it can potentially stop working. Because of this, it is outright foolish to believe that any gear is more important than another.

>>1055098
food production seems like a great candidate for full automation in this century.

>>1055089
You're a smart man/woman anon. +1 internet to you.

>>1055101
>>1055096

but could you argue that doctors like psychologist could call under the abstract thinking / artist category? depending on the psychology of course

>>1055089

>left brain people and right brain people

Bollocks.

Most scientists were also artists or mystics of some sort as well.

Just because a artists cannot do science doesn't mean a scientist cannot do art.

Actually, farmers are the most essential members of society.

No farmers = no society.

>>1055114
cooking is artistic
now GROWING the ingredents would be scientific.

A chef = an artist
a Farmer = A scientist

growing plants only becomes an art when you are arranging or growing for aesthetic value

Philosophers.

They created both the Epistemological and Metaphysical grounds for thinking, with law, science, justice, language and such.
Without them civilisation would be nothing.

lol @ your pitiful false dichotomy between left-brain and right.

Even your own example, OP, was created by a man who excelled at both the arts and sciences.

Science is art, art is science.

Herp

You can't exactly say that there's a set class of people that's most important to a society, because there are many different kinds of society with many views on what they consider most important. That's a rather subjective view on what a society considers important.

Maybe in Western Civilizations, yes, scientists and artists are up there. But so are politicians.

just my two cents

>>1055108
science is a method. its a way of doing things.

ANYTHING can be science. if you do it in a certain way.

so this thread is frankly retarded.

>>1055089
This is the worst post in history.

>left brain, right brain
You use both sides of your brain for everything.

People like Einstein, Hawking, Cox, all needed the imaginations to come up with the theories they made. They were just smart enough to comprehend the math that they needed to back it up.

Looking at programming, you generally need to be decent at math to do it, but with out imagination, you couldn't create anything useful.

>>1055123
like I said you can combine the two, I mean of course there are doctors who have unconventional "artistic" methods for lack of a better word, and duh everybody uses both sides of the brain

but everybody thinks in one spectrum or the other, I am willing to bet MOST scientist were introverts and MOST artist were extroverts.

>>1055154
No, without penicillin and the sanitation system civilization would be nothing. Philosophy is a comfort that comes after actual scientific discovery.

So you are oversimplifying everything and lumping everyone into two categories for...some reason. I see, very intredasting.

Let's see those artists and scientists fight off invaders with test tubes and pastels.

That'll show em.

The worker is the most essential being in society, the sanitation worker being the most important.

>>1055159
>Cox
As in the statistician?

OP, you're slightly wrong, as far as I see it:
Artists, engineers and scientists are what makes the world work - most everyone would fit into one of those very vague descriptions.

The rough difference is:
Artists entertain the other two and themselves, can work with both to better all aspects of work (design, concept etc.)
Scientists come up with ideas and research shit, get better ways of doing things and can also be artists and apply themselves to building stuff.
An engineer is better than a scientist or artist at building shit, and they help create the plans and fully realize them.

All three can do each others work, but naturally generally won't be as good at it (a scientist and an engineer can draw, an artist can build and research, an engineer can research etc.)

>>1055159
Exactly. And artists usually incorporate a lot of math into their works, even if subconsciously. It's not like drawing a picture doesn't engage the logical portion of your brain at all, nonsense.

>>1055154

Philosophers did not invent language or justice or thinking, you fucking moron.

They invented the metaphysical grounds for thinking? What the fuck does that mean?

>>1055173

That's just linguistically incorrect. There'd still be civilization without those things. Really. They just won't be as good.

>>1055179
With scientific research, and a desire to move together toward a greater sense of understanding, there'll be no "invaders" at the gates. Science, and economics, will make war obsolete. Your mentality belongs in the 1940s.

>>1055179

When those test tubes are full of brightly coloured explosions you bet your ass they will.

>>1055209
>>1055209
>With scientific research, and a desire to move together toward a greater sense of understanding, there'll be no "invaders" at the gates. Science, and economics, will make war obsolete.
OH WOW THIS IS WHAT FUTURISTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE.JPG

>>1055207
There'd be civilization without metaphysical speculations, is my point. Actual physical science is much more important than philosophy.

>>1055165
Holy fuck, no you can't.

Scientists, can be artists. Artists can't be scientists.

Look at computer science. Computer science, led to the creation of video games, which contain tons of art. The physics, the environments, the characters are all code, which in it contains thousands of mathmatical functions.

Art, such as music, has made no contribution science. It is purely for entertainment. No song out there has made a discovery unknown to our universe.

Art is a reflection of something. Science is the discovery of something.

>>1055242
>video games, which contain tons of art
nope, video games aren't art, sorry aspie

>>1055209
Christ.

No matter what you tell yourself, human nature will still prevail and the urge to conquer and destroy will still be there, no matter how much "understanding" you shove down everyone's throat.

OP here,

I started this thread to promote thought and discussion of said though and, in doing so, I've learned a few things. Thank you all for participating, I hope you all have/will learned/learn something as well.

let the discussion continue.

>>1055256
10/10 I am fucking pissed.

>Make a 3D model of a dragon, that flies, moves, reacts to inputs from user

Not art

>make a 2D drawing of dragon
Art

Yup, okay keep thinking that.

Sorry, that the art form I talked about is more complicated, and emotionally invoking than the boring piece of shit you like.

>>1055242

>Scientists, can be artists. Artists can't be scientists.


Say what, you know you've just contradicted yourself by stating that X can be Y, and then saying that it can't.

My mate was a free-lance artist and loved the fuck out of drawing. He then went back to college and got a BA in chemistry. He is an artist who is now a scientist.

>Art, such as music, has made no contribution science

Well let me stop you right there before you make a classic mistake: You can't say that because art is part of our world, and the onus is on you to prove that it has provided no contribution, some examples of which are:

>Making scientists happy
>Making scientists sad
>making scientists etc
>Inspiring scientists
>helping scientists work
>challenging conceptions blah blah

>>1055209
You are either idealist and young or...well, no frankly you're utterly stupid.

Intelligence is an evolutionary trait of predators. Predators, anon. We are also pack animals. The need for social hierarchy and our predilections for violence is inherent to our brains.

Even apes exercise a primitive form of tribal warfare.

We are a species of warriors, anon. Embrace it.

Hey I'm a drawfag and I'm also doing a CS/Physics degree. I'm both.

>MFW this didn't get you banned

That said, I agree. But that's for society. For civilization, you need some workers.

>>1055256
I believe that everything is art my friend.

>>1055013
I'm a cashier at McDonalds.. which am I?

>>1055242

>Scientists, can be artists. Artists can't be scientists.

>implying science isn't a art.

>>1055223
The foundations of the method of discovery were laid out in philosophy.

There was no distinction between philosophy and science in the Enlightenment. They were both integral parts of the same method and system. It was the same goal. Only recently has there developed divided camps where philosophy went off into abstraction and language and "science" became a study of physical systems.

>>1055360

An anomaly.

you're right, but man, you're gonna piss off the aspies in here

>>1055334
>draw shitty pictures on a tablet
>call yourself an artist

>>1055359
You have absolutely no taste.

Art is not a carte blanche word for 'pleasing aesthetics'. You're just uneducated.

>>1055360
You are a financial artiste; such delicate motions you make as you wave money around as swift as a ballet dancer to the mesmerizing tones of the cash register.

>>1055311
Music has also been shown to help people with Parkinsons

>>1055223

A civilization without metaphysical speculation would be a very monotonous and close-minded civilization. Not much better that what you claim.

/r9k/, come on. Artists can't be scientists and vice versa is a linguistic fallacy. It takes creative thinking in order to ask the right questions in science and progress. It takes creativity to come up with scientific solutions. Likewise, in the arts, it takes a certain level of cognition and logic in order to formulate a philosophy, or amazing demonstrations in your cognitive ability to paint a good painting. You use both at all times. Con't next post.

>>1055242

>Scientists, can be artists. Artists can't be scientists.

All that is happening here is that you are taking the middle of the scientist/artist-Venn diagram and calling all of those people scientists.

This conversation is so fucking stupid it is making me angry. Please stop trying to be deep.

>>1055303
>video games
>more complicated, and emotionally invoking
What's it like being a stunted manchild who still plays video games beyond the age of 20?

ITT: stupid people get profound.

>>1055311
The act of making art, cannot be considered science. The act of contributing to science can be considered art.

I apologize I wasn't literal enough for you.

Music in itself, contributed to the emotional well being of the scientist, but did not contribute to the science itself.

Your arguement comparing my arguement of >Scientists, can be artists. Artists can't be scientists.
to
>x=y

is retarded.

Think of it like, all boats are vehicles, but not all vehicles are boats.

>>1055395
>Art is not a carte blanche word for 'pleasing aesthetics'.

"the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/art

>>1055422

i

you're

a troll

You think a game isn't more complex than a static 2d image? Whatever, I'm leaving this life.

So many fucking unread sophomores.

The only thing profound about this thread is the stupidity.

>>1055393
Hey, I do some digital painting and 3D modelling. I draw in pencil usually, and some painting once in a while. How is tablet drawing not an art? I don't do those shitty cartoon stick figures. What do you consider art?

An old lady got millions of dollars for selling an artwork which was actually just a pile of mulch. People called that art. Someone else sold a boulder as art. Modern art and minimalism is about creating either the messiest piece of shit or the most boring canvas possible. Do you call any of that art?

>>1055173
>Not knowing science is just applied empiricist philosophy
>ISHYGDDT