Relationship Between Knowledge In The Arts And The Natural Sciences

Interpreted literally, ethical judgements do seem to limit methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences; it’s not difficult to imagine the chaos of a world void of any kind of ethical considerations. However, can knowledge in the natural sciences even be compared to knowledge in the arts? Knowledge in the natural sciences includes knowledge that helps improve methods used in hospitals to treat previously untreatable illnesses. Art at first glance does not hold enough weight to be compared because it reaches a smaller number of people giving it less importance than knowledge gained in natural sciences. Nevertheless, art might not reach many people at one time, but it does spread ideas and judgements

Does the artist hold any ethical responsibility or do these start with the interpretation of the observer? If artists are criticised or even censored in places, how can this be freedom of speech? Freedom of speech should not limit the methods used in the production of ideas. Some artistic methods have surfaced which offended people. People have started killing animals for art in order to make people aware of how much harm we do to our environment with the use of different chemicals. Artists wanted to show how we are gradually destroying our world through the immoral actions people try to avoid. Kant would not agree with the artists as its action is not ethical, but utilitarianism could eventually agree with these methods, because observers do react to the artistic pieces and that makes them aware of what we do. The reaction comes from the idea and if these are exposed to the world, they eventually will spread. These ideas can vary from one educational field to another, not restricting itself to one particular field like the natural sciences. All knowledge obtained from the arts then raises more questions, which in return makes it harder to solve and thus people will dig into more unethical ideas. The questions that I am dealing with is; do we people start being aware of what we all do and consciously change our habits because of the idea, or do we judge the artist for doing something so unethical and turn our heads? Does art even have to have some kind of purpose or is it being art alone purpose enough? Can an art that is not ethically based have a bigger reaction and consequently higher value? If an art piece makes people react, can we classify all these kind of methods as unethical? Yolanda