Introduction
The arts and the natural sciences have profoundly affected human thinking. Culture, technology, and socioeconomic ideas have all grown exponentially due to this double-edged quest for knowledge. Explainable refers to everything that can be reduced to a set of physical laws or a set of unambiguous physical properties (Shafir et al. 58).
On the one hand, the unexplainable represents concepts that defy explanation and are hence viewed as ethereal or immaterial (Medawar 79). People find the inexplicable intriguing and strive to create theories to explain the inexplicable phenomena. On the other hand, the explainable helps people grasp the nature of the world around them, whether metaphysical or real. This essay will follow a structured plan whereby I will discuss the claims and counterclaims for the significance of both the explained and the unexplained from the perspective of arts and natural sciences. I will look into the matter of explainable and unexplainable using various artistic examples and discuss how they support the relevant claims set-up.
The Role of Unexplained Phenomena in Advancing Natural Sciences
Research in the natural sciences is driven by a desire to understand or provide an explanation for phenomena seen in the natural world. Evidence and justification are crucial to the discussion since knowledge is required to be valid (Chomsky 351). Unexplained phenomena in the natural sciences are among the field’s most significant breakthroughs.
For example, the unexpected discovery of penicillin has had far-reaching consequences that defy explanation (Sand 900). The background of this wonder medication by Alexander Fleming is quite confusing. Things that defy explanation arouse curiosity and motivate people to look for answers, opening the door to new areas of study and the potential for knowledge expansion (Sand 901).
In this scenario, the scientist’s investigation into the mold developing in the petri dish ultimately led to the formation of a theory. During that historical period, the discovery of this mold’s antibacterial capabilities contributed to the advancement of society’s overall production. There was no protection against bacterial illnesses in the 19th century (Sand 900). The development of the medical field, as well as the development of humans, was aided by this unexplained incident.
The Relativity of Truth and Explanation in Scientific Inquiry
Nothing in natural science can genuinely be considered explainable, as the very nature of science is relative to people’s knowledge. People need to know what an absolute truth is before figuring out how to recognize an explainable occurrence (Chomsky 351). An absolute truth holds regardless of location or time. Nevertheless, such a theory or entity does not exist in science. Although it may be possible to determine that a given theory is correct 99.99% of the time, this does not make it an absolute truth, as an absolute truth would be correct 100% of the time (Hauser 45). Words used to define a theory are, by their very definition, relative; one term has significance only about the others.
Scientific inquiry aims to embody the truth in a form that can be verified by experimentation. For example, the knowledge that light is a wave serves as the basis of the explainable, which is also the nature of science that has altered people’s understanding. (Shafir et al. 58). While it is generally accepted that light travels in waves, that is not usually how it is categorized. None of the theories actively seek to follow their corresponding rules; humans utilize these principles to justify their ideas rationally. Because science is by its very nature relative to our knowledge, this leads to the conclusion that nothing in natural science can be called explainable.
Art as an Expressive Medium for Human Emotion and Knowledge
The arts are a highly expressive area of knowledge in a society. The spectrum of art includes the visual arts, musical theater, and literary arts. A universally accepted definition of art is nearly impossible to pin down, as each art form employs a distinctive medium and a distinct process. Art expands one’s worldview and gives one language to express the ineffable complexities of human emotions.
For example, in the painting by Vincent van Gogh named At Eternities Gate, the artist used his skills to convey the emotion felt by an ailing and older man (Van Gogh-Bonger and Martin Gayford 12). In the artwork, the older man’s hands are squeezed tightly against his face, locked in a fist. This man’s cognitive dissonance is readily apparent in his stance (Van Gogh-Bonger and Martin Gayford 16). The transmission of knowledge in art might occasionally be solely dependent on one’s vision, yet works like this picture all share the conclusion that this man is sad. The art employs relatable ideas like emotion via emotive language or skillful images.
The Inexplicability of Art Rooted in Cultural and Religious Contexts
The very essence of inexplicability in art stems from misunderstandings regarding the underlying meaning behind the piece of work. This issue is frequently seen in artworks that depict religious symbols and ceremonial occasions (Chomsky 351). It is impossible to call the information acquired from seeing art based on these ideas’ actual knowledge. The fundamental definition of knowledge is justified real belief; thus, if an artist attempts to depict the scene without having seen any religious icons or participated in any religious events, they would never be able to fully capture the meaning behind the desired work (Medawar 130).
For example, any religious portrait of the Prophet (pbuh) is regarded as unreliable because the artist has never seen the Prophet (Hilali 265). Because of the inaccuracy of the painting, this work of art cannot be adequately described and is, therefore, regarded as unexplained (Hilali 267). In this case, it can be summarized that an artist’s confusion concerning their artwork is the basis of poor explanation regarding natural sciences.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the unexplainable aspects of science are more crucial than the explicable nature of science in both fields of study. The mystery of science motivates researchers to try to understand it better, which might result in developing new fields of study. When people do not know how something works, they have to get creative in explaining it. Yet, since the explicable has previously been explained and applied, leading to development but not creating new knowledge, the unexplainable is more relevant for natural scientists. Nonetheless, artists should consider the medium’s inherent capacity to give form to intangible feelings.
Art conveys the intangible and illimitable, which science and other disciplines fail to do. Humans are born with a natural capacity for empathy, and artists tap on it to help viewers feel connected to their work. Art is something that can only be appreciated after it is understood. If the observer does not grasp what the artist is trying to convey, the work is meaningless, and the artist has wasted their time. So, the explicable is more significant for artists since it lends context to their creations.
Works Cited
Chomsky, Noam. “18 Science, Mind, and Limits of Understanding.” Language, Syntax, and the Natural Sciences (2018): 351.
Hauser, Arnold. The philosophy of art history. Routledge, 2018. Web.
Hilali, A. Z. “Western Media and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) Presentation: Response From the Muslim World.” The Discourse 6.1 (2020): 259-277. Web.
Medawar, Peter Brian. The art of the soluble. Routledge, 2021. Web.
Sand, Martin. “Did Alexander Fleming Deserve the Nobel Prize?” Science and Engineering Ethics 26.2 (2020): 899-919. Web.
Shafir, Tal, et al. “The state of the art in creative arts therapies.” Frontiers in psychology 11 (2020): 68. Web.
Van Gogh-Bonger, Jo, and Martin Gayford. A Memoir of Vincent Van Gogh. Getty Publications, 2018.