Scientific and Artistic Creativity: In Search of Unifying Analogies

  • Ernesto Carafoli


This chapter will attempt to demonstrate that the structure of the creativity process is the same in the artistic and scientific cultures, even if the two cultures are intrinsically different. The differences are clear: the practitioners of the scientific culture aim at acquiring impersonal and objective knowledge that will withstand the scrutiny by others, while the practitioners of the artistic culture aim at generating personal, subjective knowledge that does not need verification. Science makes progress, art changes, but does not make progress: the scientific theories of the early Greeks are now little more than historical curiosities, whereas Praxiteles’ sculptures have the same value and importance today as they had more than 2000 years ago. Science is right or wrong, art cannot be right or wrong. On this accepted background, this chapter will work to show that both cultures, different as they may be, nevertheless have the same aim. They try to understand reality and to make sense of it. The statement is not obvious: by traditional consensus, the search for truth and the generation of beauty have been considered the distinctive goals of the two cultures: Samuel Taylor Coleridge [1] summed up the concept in his incisive prose nearly 200 years ago:

The proper and immediate object of science is the acquirement, or communication of truth: the proper and immediate object of poetry is the communication of immediate pleasure.


Golden Ratio Artistic Creativity Artistic Product Sewing Machine Aesthetic Perception 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S.T. Coleridge: Definition of poetry (1811). In: The Literary Remains of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, collected and edited by H.N. Coleridge, vol. II (William Pickering, London 1856)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Klee: Das Bildnerische Denken. Schriften zur Form und Gestaltungslehre, Vol. 1 (Benno Schwabe Verlag, Basel und Stuttgart 1956)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Monod: Symmetry and Function of Biological Systems at theMolecular Level. Nobel Symposium, A. Engström and B. Sandberg (eds.) (Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm 1968) 15–27Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Mitchell: Chemiosmotic Coupling in Oxidative and Photosynthetic Phosphorylation (Glynn Research Ltd., Bodmin 1966)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G.H. Hardy: A Mathematician’s Apology (Cambridge University Press, London 1940)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P.A.M. Dirac: The Evolution of the Physicist’s Picture of Nature. Sci. American 208, 45–53, 1963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Schroedinger: An undulatory theory of the mechanics of atoms and molecules. Phys. Rev. 28, 1049–107 (1926)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Plato: Phaedrus and Hippias Major. In: Dialogues (Appleton and Co., New York 1898)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Hume: Of the Standard of Taste. In: Four Dissertations (A. Millar, London 1757)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    I. Kant: Kritik der Urteilskraft (Lagarde und Friedrich, Berlin und Libau 1790)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Weyl: Symmetry (Princeton University Press, Princeton 1983)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Frey: Studium Generale 2, 268–278 (1949)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E.H. Gombrich: Symmetrie, Wahrnehmung und künstlerische Gestaltung. In R. Wille (ed): Symmetrie in Geistes-und Naturwissenschaft (Springer, Berlin 1988) 94–119Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Arnheim: A Review of Proportion. In: G. Kepes (ed): Module, Proportion, Symmetry and Rhythm (Georg Brazilier, New York 1966) 218–230Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Pape-Moller: Evolution, 49, 658–670 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Di Dio, E. Macaluso, and G. Rizolatti: PloS One, 11, 1201–1208 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Jacobsen, R.I. Schuboth, L. Hoepel and Y.V. Cramon: Neuroimage 29, 276–285 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. Lambert: John Constable and the Theory of Landscape Painting (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. Cézanne, Letter to Emile Bernard, 1904Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. Schatz: Jenseits der Gene (Verlag Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Zürich 2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E. Montale: Ossi di Seppia (Rivoluzione Liberale, Torino 1925)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    F.G. Lorca: Imagination, Inspiration, Evasion. Lecture at the Ateneo of Granada 1928Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    F.A. Kekulé: Benzolfest Berichte der deutschen chemischen Gesellschaft 23, 1302–1311 (1890)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    G. Leopardi: La Sera del Dì di Festa. In: Canti (Le Monnier, Firenze 1835)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    V. Sereni: La Strada di Creva. In: Frontiera (Edizioni di Corrente, Milano 1941)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C.P. Snow: The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge University Press, London 1959)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ernesto Carafoli
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Chimica Biologica, Istituto Veneto di Medicina MolecolareUniversità degli Studi di PadovaPadovaItaly

Personalised recommendations