Text Practice Mode

Neuroscience and Art 1

created Apr 12th 2019, 06:17 by Ramsay Smith



251 words
35 completed
The fields of scientific study and artistic expression have seldom been considered within the same contexts. Historically, science has been considered objective and factual, based on explaining complexity through simple modalities while art has largely been regarded as subjective and imaginative, and often incoherent with "thinking scientifically". In fact, common stereotypes can be observed in casual discourse among those debating scientific intelligence versus artistic intelligence, where previously held believes included the idea that some individuals think/process the world predominantly using their "right" or "left" brain (one scientific, the other artistic). However, as modern neuroscience tells us, this is merely a myth that has been perpetuated, most likely due to the fact that most people are unaware that the theory of a "split-brain" intelligence is out of date; this is because, while specific areas of the brain represent specific modules, these isolated components are not sufficient to explain the complexity of intelligence, which is most likely a result of bidirectional communication and feedback loops of many interconnected brain areas. Therefore, it stands to reason that cognition is a manifestation of multiple types of intelligence, such as those postulated by Gardner as bodily-kinesthetic/visual-spatial ("artistic") and the more traditional verbal-linguistic/logical-mathematical ("scientific"), with all interacting within an individual, possibly with some predominating. Simply put, everything has a biological basis, but to what extent something may be an emergent psychosocial property is readily debatable and the extent to which this dilutes the contribution of individual components' explanations to the overall process is even more debatable.   

saving score / loading statistics ...