Artists would ask, why do so many scientists and engineers have such trouble telling good art from terrible art? Why do they have so much trouble distinguishing what they "can" do from what they "should" do? (example: the intense regret that many Manhattan Project scientists experienced during the Cold War)
Scientific knowledge affects all of us, but it is only one of a number of domains of knowledge. If you judge art based on scientific understanding, of course you're going to have trouble. It would be like trying to score a baseball game with football rules.
Maybe someday we'll be able to apply the equations of science to art--I do believe in a mechanical, causal universe (i.e. I don't believe in crystal magic). But art is a product of culture, which is itself an abstraction of incredibly complex interactions of incredibly complex systems: human beings.
Edit to add: artists have trouble with understanding science because they are attempting to judge it with their artistic understanding of the world. It's the inverse of my sports analogy above--they are trying to score a football game with baseball rules, so they get it wrong.
My point is that does not mean they are dumb or ignorant or incapable of critical thinking. Just differently trained and coming from a different context.
For what it's worth, there are plenty of engineers and programmers who also have trouble with scientific knowledge (see discussions of climate change here on HN or Slashdot). I think that is because engineering and science are two closely related, but ultimately different domains of knowledge.
Scientific knowledge affects all of us, but it is only one of a number of domains of knowledge. If you judge art based on scientific understanding, of course you're going to have trouble. It would be like trying to score a baseball game with football rules.
Maybe someday we'll be able to apply the equations of science to art--I do believe in a mechanical, causal universe (i.e. I don't believe in crystal magic). But art is a product of culture, which is itself an abstraction of incredibly complex interactions of incredibly complex systems: human beings.
Edit to add: artists have trouble with understanding science because they are attempting to judge it with their artistic understanding of the world. It's the inverse of my sports analogy above--they are trying to score a football game with baseball rules, so they get it wrong.
My point is that does not mean they are dumb or ignorant or incapable of critical thinking. Just differently trained and coming from a different context.
For what it's worth, there are plenty of engineers and programmers who also have trouble with scientific knowledge (see discussions of climate change here on HN or Slashdot). I think that is because engineering and science are two closely related, but ultimately different domains of knowledge.