Skip to main content
Log in

Understanding: Art and science

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The arts and the sciences perform many of the same cognitive functions, both serving to advance understanding. This paper explores some of the ways exemplification operates in the two fields. Both scientific experiments and works of art highlight, underscore, display, or convey some of their own features. They thereby focus attention on them, and make them available for examination and projection. Thus, the Michelson-Morley experiment exemplifies the constancy of the speed of light. Jackson Pollock'sNumber One exemplifies the viscosity of paint. Despite their similarities, science and art might seem to differ in their attitude toward facts. Science is said to adhere to facts; art, to be indifferent to them. Such, I urge, is not the case. Science, like art, often scorns fact to advance understanding through fiction. Thought experiments, I contend, are scientific fictions; literary and pictorial fictions, aesthetic thought experiments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This paper was first published in 1991, in Peter A. French, Theodore Uehling Jr., and Howard Wettstein (eds.),Philosophy and the Arts, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Vol. XVI, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, pp. 196–208.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elgin, C.Z. Understanding: Art and science. Synthese 95, 13–28 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064665

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064665

Keywords

Navigation