The Pendulum Swings... Part 2

The Pendulum Swings... Part 2

The art and the science of everything is really about the duality between technicality and artistry. Rather honestly, I think art and science were actually largely the same until industrialisation and extreme separation of these subjects through education - just so that you could figure out who's better at what. However, many of the best scientists in the past were also great writers and were highly philosophical, as the true scientific method is actually an art in itself - figuring out what's false through logical methods with logical assumptions, which requires a lot of personalisation. There's no real way of separating the two completely, which is why I'm talking about this.

The Duality

Arts and science have always been polar opposites in this day. However are they really polar opposites? I would beg to differ from the "conventional" wisdom and say that a more conventional wisdom would actually argue that they're actually two sides of the same coin.

Science

Science talks about things which can be objectified, such as precise measurements or large sample studies having things which can be defined to numbers. But at the same time the scientific method is actually about disproving rather than proving anything, as the only empirical way of ever proving something right is through mathematics which is not a valid for many multi-factorial situations. (Or at least we haven't reached the level to be able to do prove all these ideas).

Art

Art, instead, accepts the fact that many things are not able to be fully explained purely by measurements and things which are "objective". It recognises that there are many layers and a lot of depth in a person's and in nature's structures that cannot be easily explained, or should be left unexplained as it's a lot more about perspective than overtly obvious evidence. It embraces the subjectivity of the situation, therefore also recognises the need to share views in terms of interpretation and experiences from situations or works, to widen perspective and increase awareness. However, art believes that all views are valid as long as there are logical steps taken towards understanding and appreciating situations and perspectives.

What it Means

Science and art are simply two different ways of viewing experiences. One talks about the objective measurables while art talks about the interpretation, perspective and openness. In music, that would be the duality of technique (chops) vs musicality. In medicine, that would be diagnostic and management knowledge vs ability to set up a therapeutic alliance. In research, that would be accuracy and precision vs originality and presentation. The list goes on indefinitely. And we actually all know that the success of a person or a group of people in an area is about the balance between the art and science of it, when put into practice it's hard to do.

What's Easy To Do

The easiest thing to do is actually to concentrate on one aspect and completely stick to it because if you stick to the subjective then there's no good or bad, no wrong or right, everything is gray. Meanwhile, if you stick completely to technique there's always a wrong or right, and it's much easier to dictate the lines and stick to the rules. Both are extremist, and thus are very clear guidelines are set: it's either everything is right, or there is an obvious split between the two. Neither of these are human though; to be too subjective is equivalent to no ability to learn or gain new appreciation as "every opinion is valid", while being too objective is equivalent to having the Ten Commandments - no one can truly achieve it. Thus both lead to A. frustrated people B. bigots C. pampered kids.

What's Difficult to Do

If you want to blend the two it's as difficult as trying to get that perfect shade of gray for yourself from black and white. It takes a long time because sometimes just a drop of white makes it too white, while adding black into it just spoils it again.

It takes a lot of trial and error and a lot of reflection for one to be able to reach a level where there is ability to separate as well as mix the two viewpoints together into one. But once you've found the right balance for yourself, it suddenly becomes easy and a part of you until your taste changes (but even then you would've found the new level of equilibrium already).

Practical Tips to Find Your Equilibrium

Another word for it would be balance of course. Well, to find the great point of the pendulum where you can define as your equilibrium state you have to start by knowing which obvious preference you have - towards musicality or technique, and going to the other end of the spectrum completely.

Much like the previous post, the best way to learn is by going to the other extreme end - put yourself to in a position which is by far uncomfortable such that you can experience something completely different and pick up a completely new skill. And to put yourself to that extreme the mindset must be there - to take on a new perspective and new knowledge altogether. You have to unlearn everything you learned (ie don't look at anything as if you know anything anymore, but instead be like a sponge and learn).

When you have taken both extremes, it is then possible to modulate as you're now able to see which perspective is really yours, the artistic or the technical one. It's the same with music - if you love Tchaikovsky's melodies, try out Schoenberg for lack of one. If you love complex harmony like Debussy, Brahms, Ravel, try going to Vivaldi and Haydn for lack of overtly complex ones.

Most Importantly

With that, you are able to find your true equilibrium rather than settling for an extreme and never feeling happy with where you are. Find your niche and the area you're happy with. Find people who belong to the extremes to experience their point of view but don't go fully in, instead find out what fits you the most. This is one you'll experience ease towards happiness, never really needing to work just to feel happy.