I liked the introduction of the article with phrase of "what to think to how to think," but the article becomes boring and boring with repeatitive words and examples. The author should 'rethink' about that part.
Through out the article, the author argues about scientists being artists with instinct and gut feeling, and artists being scentists with logic in their arts. As an architecture major, which classifies as neither art nor science but also at the same time it is a mixture of both science and art, science and art are strongly realted to each other.
Generally, art is defined as expression and science is logic. Ture. Definitely.
However, as the article is arguing, art requries logical thinking to transform internal feeling into an external expression, and science , too. It also requires artistic inspiration or instict to get idea to start.
However, putting this idea into educational system?
Is any preschoolers or elementary students even understand clear meaning of logic, instict, death and alive? Or even how many of highschoolers understand relationship between gut feeling and logic and thinking back and forth? It will be great if school can 'teach' that and students can 'learn' that, but how many people knows explain that process of chaing? Even most of people in article says, it is hard to explain but there is a thing. Education has to be a clearer process. Not just a 'thing' in your mind that you can't explain.
If there is no try and no change, there will be no improvement.
However, as the article says, before you say "Eureka!" you have to find out solution.
Good try and a nice article, but not yet fully agreeable.
No comments:
Post a Comment