The result of an unusual collaboration between a physicist with a strong interest in the histories of art and science, and a philosopher with a broad knowledge of science as a human activity, The Art of Science gives readers an appreciation of the activities of the hands-on work of experimentation, the struggle to convince people of the validity of novel findings, and the excitement of "eureka" moments. In so doing, the book shows how scientific knowledge is made, and occasionally unmade.
The Art of Science steers a course between two important and contradictory images that have a myth-like that of the scientist as computer, and that of the scientist as genius. If we abandon these images to focus on what scientists really do, we see that the sciences are also arts. To show the artistry of science, text and images are woven together, so that the book makes its arguments not just through stories of science, but through vibrant and arresting illustrations that help to bring the activity of science to life. The Art of Science shows science not as austere and other-worldly, but as textured and wonderfully human.
The Art of Science was a fun read and a valiant effort to tie together art and science.
As a scientist it’s very enjoyable to read a book that includes artistic references and pictures and to think, “Right on, I’m not just a scientist but also an artist!” But sorry, science is not art. Yes it involves creativity. But at its core it is trying to uncover truths whereas art is trying to create feelings. The summary ‘why science is art’ fails to convince… yes, perhaps the business of science has things in common with the business of art; they both are hard work, involve creativity, take place in the real world, and require funding. However the differences in their purposes and perspectives far outweigh the business parallels. A follow-on volume ‘The Art of Accounting’ could find similar parallels and would perhaps excite accountants into thinking they are also artists - but would fail to convince for the same underlying reasons.
All that said, the book is an enjoyable read and provides great examples of why science’s search for the truth is not easy and rarely a straight line.