imagine being like
i gave birth to a child called science and art
then i found them to eat them back into me
Discussion
to me, this is about what people drag to the feet of science like a cat with a dead mouse
and science is like: um do you eat this? are you showing me your snack? or what. cos i dont eat chipmunks and mice and voles and squirrels.
so if you are not and i am not
why are cats
we dont know why cats are the way cats are
but that is a tangent
me? i dont waste the food i make and eat
ok so science
science humble science
science science science
people putting science on a pedestal and wielding science like a knife when science is on the ground
science is forever a toddler
science is Curiosity incarnate
hey science? let me tie your shoes
NO
ok you dont know how to tie them tho?
you want to figure it out yourself?
YES
that is science
give me the means and give me space
if i cant reproduce it myself
you are the hoax
that's toddler
that's being on the ground
hey look at that? is that block made out of wood? lemme check
~puts it in mouth~
yup tastes like wood i can verify that is wood
to me, this is easy to hold and understand as a sibling
especially an older sibling who was gently corrected by a parent like: you need to let your younger sibling figure it out. as you got to figure it out when you were the only baby. they get that space to do that, too. why? cos toddlerhood is scientist time and those ways and skills and ingenuity last a lifetime
making methods
what makes for verification to oneself?
is it just tasting a block of wood that determines wood? do ya gotta sink your teeth in to also check the hardness? do you light it on fire to see if it catches like wood? when is "enough" to know it is wood?
that is up to each and every scientist
one scientist may need a sliver to examine under a microscope
another just needs some sandpaper to be like: yea i know wood well enough this can be sanded that is wood
someone else is like: if i dont plant a seed, grow a tree, cut a branch, make a block myself: then it isnt wood
scientific preference
when is something enough to say
im confident this step is secure
that my work up to this point is accurate
i can rest on this block being wood to me and i can explain why
in this way can we see science's relation to their sibling, art
and to their parentage, alchemy
traces are there
common ground like determination, ingenuity, to bring work forth
why did alchemy have children, science and art
for the most part i do think that is a riddle for the ages
but really, as things tumble forward thru time, as complexity arises
there are simply different needs when it comes to verification
reproducibility was a desire
to make a common ground way in consensus
science said oh! that's me for life
art said im not so sure that's me ultimately
lets roll back back back
to the renaissance to the great painting workshops
a lot of those painters were training under reproducibility. it was a technical craft. the skill of painting, the skill of making pigments, the math of specific proportions for specific reasons under specific schools of thought. to apprentice for a long time under a master.
to find a patron, to be able to start your own workshop, to have your own apprentices to make something distinct
to make something that cannot be reproduced to make something singular entirely, something arresting, captivating, maddening, soothing
the type of verification that lands all at once
like: im sure as shit that's you
i dont need method for this
i dont need to reproduce it
i dont need to do that myself
to know you when i find you
i know you made that painting
not this painting, not this painting, not this painting
That One
we can see how art tumbled into curation
what it is to be a curator
what it is to go into art history as an academic field
what it is to work in museum collections and preservation and conservation
what it is to have the expertise to say:
i have determined this is a lost painting by this artist and i can make that case and tell you why in these ways
to say: ive studied one artist i know their work
i know the pigments available at that time
i know the brushes they preferred
i know the weight of their hand during those harder years for them
i know in what order they paint in what shadow
i know their preferred varnish
like yea i can tell you to me? i would buy that painting because the claim that it is genuine is true as far as i can see
or dude not a chance not even close that is hoax on hoax forgery
or what a smile, this forgery has so much artistry all its own i love it who even needs the og artist when this is better hell yea for the anon painting
science does not stand for that like a curator does
so we can see a much wider divergence here downstream
science is like: this painting is going under an electron microscope. if we do not have methods yet we will make them. if we do not have tools yet we will make them.
curator like: you are missing the point
imagine misusing a painting
a painting is for enjoyment
for display
for people to experience it
science: sorry im not a trophy hunter i care about truth not acquisition
sometimes siblings disagree
that fight is on worthy grounds
places of:
agree to disagree
is some of the most critical gravity weight bearing math there is
those agree to disagree places are hallowed ground
never ever in a mild way like not scary
so normal
but truly never go for full alignment