Paul Richardson: Art versus science

A visual reference is that art is laying field rock or stone and science is like laying concrete blocks. One requires an eye or a feel for how the outcome will look and the other can be completed by following well defined methods that control the position, level, and thickness of the binder. 

That, my friend, is not a direct quote, but is the essence of what Mr. Bill Keith stated during my freshman year in high school. 

As the teacher that was front and center in the advanced level freshman science class and also taught physics and the more advanced math classes, he was trying to create an understanding that while both art and science are important, they are quite different. 

Each requires a different approach and not everyone has the skill sets to do both. Some people are very free-form and can’t follow the rigid protocols that science demands, and others need that unflexing guide and never are able to see, touch, feel, or hear the siren’s call.

The term of art is applied to a lot of different areas, for example, the art of the deal, the art of relationships, and the one that stimulated this line of thought, the art of conversation. 

As I stated, the art of conversation was the thought that was the catalyst for this meandering, but I am not certain that conversation is all art. I believe that it is a combination of both, art and science. Bear with me if you will and consider these points; the verbal delivery of information is best served if certain guidelines are applied. 

Nouns, verbs, and all the other components that make up sentence structure must be followed if you want someone to understand what you are saying. Just throwing the words out there and pasting them together is a delightful, artful form can end up simply confusing and meaningless babble. So, as we vocalize out points, some real science is applied.

The art part, that is quite a different proposal all together. The art is in the listening. Perhaps it should be referred to as the art of listening. 

Conversation is a two-way street, but in today’s culture it seems that everyone is simply wanting to take on the verbal delivery aspect and leave the listening to someone else. Listening and really hearing what someone is saying is truly an art. 

This means you can’t be thinking about how you are going to respond and creating your next set of verbiage (I am certain that is the word that I wanted to use, if you are in doubt, look it up) but instead you are focusing on what is being said and the thoughts that are being expressed.

I have found over the past several months that while someone may be a polar opposite from me, maybe politically, culturally, or theologically, there are a lot of things that we actually have in common. When I am patient enough to employ the “art of listening”, I have found that if we can focus and start a conversation of the items in common, the path will lead to either breaking down the issues at odds or at least shedding some new light and providing a new framework for the thoughts that surround those issues.

For those that can only climb onto their soapbox and proclaim, well, maybe their use of the science is not as practical as it may seem. The goal may not be art versus science, but art meets science, and they peacefully coexist.