Volume 8, Number 4, 2016

Tirtha Prasad Mukhopadhyay Ph.D
Associate Professor, Digital Arte y Empresa, Universidad de Guanajuato, Campus Irapuato-Salamanca, Mexico.

Volume 8, Number 4, 2016 I Full Text PDF

DOI: 10.21659/rupkatha.v8n4.01

The focus for this issue has been human sciences – perhaps a term that indicates toward a total scientific orientation, that is an approach based on observation, experiment and hypothesis testing, as much as codifying the phenomenal properties of human life by means of predictive mathematical models. In short, the question is to understand the complex and biologically advanced nature of the human corpus, and the array of intricate functions and behaviors visible in the social sphere. To accomplish this task is also to ask for a mysterious version of material nature, no less fascinating than a mystical or religious myth of creation.

            It would be erroneous to suggest that an initiative for human sciences has been the product of European enlightenment, and its post-modern variations. The skeptical temperament also writes the genesis of a universe. A good Indian example is Charvaka. In the West, Sextus Empiricus emphasized on the possibility of knowledge, and the importance of empirical understanding. All other systems of knowledge are fancy toys that promote idle speculative conundrums.

            The question that we should posit logically is how we should define the scientific initiative for human arts and intuitions, and for culture. The answer is already on the way. The development of anthropology and cognitive sciences tends to re-invent the problems that were once relegated to philosophy, and psychology. But this is only a brand simple way of advocacy for the social sciences. The arts could benefit from a science based approach if its qualities were harnessed for our world, which is so full of unexpected quirks, and possibilities non sequitur. Technologies have rendered the older artistic and expressive formats obsolete.

            But all the more interesting is the vision of the new knowledge that is beginning to emerge with science based approaches to some profound human questions. I find the disconnectedness and?  focalization of paradigm very interesting. It is as if we only know about localized structures. The experimental proof of a certain activity or trend in human society gives us certitude about that particular aspect ?w?hich has been investigated, and no more?, ?and neither is there certainty that the conclusion may not be challenged, modified or abrogated and hence bringing about unpredictable connections in the concatenation.  Perhaps the sciences promote a regard for the method, more than that of any inference. But the sciences offer the conviction that this is the best we could do to resolve the crises and torrents of life.

Art/Science: Problem-Solving Model as a Unifying Principle of Creativity in Art and Science

Slobodan Dan Paich, Artship Foundation, San Francisco, USA

Download PDF Version


Possible procedural similarities between abstract problems mathematically expressed, engineering problems mechanically resolved, collective tensions and yearning expressed as significant poetic, acoustic or visual manifestations in art will be explored through a series of open questions and reflections. We begin with a short analysis and comparison of the methodologies of Nicola Tesla and Leonardo da Vinci, and explore issues raised by examples of imagination in scientific discovery, such as the German chemist Friedrich August Kekulé resolving the riddle of the benzene ring in 1865. The exploration will include reflection on issues of:

   1. Mastery and skill sets

   2. Preparing the field and gathering elements for research

   3. Cognitive modeling in Art and Science

   4. Unexpected connections/discovery

   5. Motivation to complete

Before ending with an open-ended summary, we will include the segment of questions and answers from an ongoing dialogue between the author of this paper and Dr. Paul Pangaro, Board Member of Artship Foundation, Cybernetics practitioner, theorist and the proponent of Conversation Theory.

Editorial, Volume V, Number 1

It should not be out of place for us here to think of giving an outline to a kind of project, which was on our minds till a certain time but which could not be either discussed or implemented for the lack of appropriate opportunities. Could it be possible to think of a center or academy devoted to neuroscience, evolutionary studies, aesthetics, environment and medicine. Perhaps there is no one single institution in which information from such disciplines could be studied with a general redressive purpose. An institute which shall contain interdisciplinary course work intending to develop modules of analysis regarding behavioral functions, or components of human social existence is the call of the day. This call is driven by the very simple notion that what men and women need are scientific insights into the roots of their own existence and being, and a study of the conditions that would be conducive to free, uninhibited livelihood. Perhaps such insights lead to amelioration of health. The connection between neurophysiological realities of the brain and any form of physical exercise, athletics or sports seemed to have been already grasped by ancient systems of religion. Economists are studying the effects of microlevel redressal measures in the context of attempts made in order to bring about radical changes on macroeconomic level. Answer to such questions as how the arts emerge in human societies can explain the nature of aesthetically motivated actions. It is indeed time for us to conceive of the formation of a society that could discuss issues related to our lives and its environment, our culture and the arts that we perform. Please send us your suggestions or proposals for the formation of such a society. We look forward to hearing from you.

Tirtha Prasad  Mukhopadhyay, Editor-in-Chief