Ask The Expert - Foxing - FIZZ Gallery

• title = What can cognitive science bring to art and museums?

• Comment = Maurice Benayoun has applied cognitive science, VR and AR too many at installations throughout his life.

• Cognitive science model of what happens in the brain of a perceiver of art
• The model was first published in 2004 it's cited often in the field of empirical aesthetics
• it tries to explain how we process artworks by claiming that:
  • there are perceptual analyzers followed by
  • implicit memory integrations or familiarity aspects then
  • explicit classifications where the perceiver in his perception perceives the style or the content
  • followed by later stages that we called cognitive mastering

• cognitive science can provide museums and artists with a specific understanding
• of how the interaction between artworks and viewers can operate
• this meeting explores potential applications of cognitive sciences to museums and art

via Nicolás Alcalá in the Design Science Studio

Mixing science and art to make the truth more interesting than lies. (n.d.). Retrieved September 28, 2021, from https://theconversation.com/mixing-science-and-art-to-make-the-truth-more-interesting-than-lies-100221?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=bylinetwitterbutton

I really love this illustration.

It is important to not only understand what the content is that we are teaching but to understand what goes into the content that we are teaching. The article gives exampled of art and science; the importance is not only on the art or science it is the history and understanding of artists and their meaning and "knowledge of scientific facts and theories, the scientific method, and evidence-based reasoning"

I believe this sentence very accurately characterizes the intentions and the foundations of the New College Curriculum; The New College seeks to provide students with a core knowledge of the arts (especially how they are applied in our society) that can be further strengthened and complemented in studies of math and science should students so choose in the future. This sort of foundation, outlined in both the document and the mission of the New Curriculum, is important because it can allow students to examine a wide range of academic fields before studying concrete methods of applying those fields practically. Since I am taking the Art: Inside/Out Engagement, I also sought to interpret this sentence in taking "arts" literally to mean art in its various expressive forms. In this way, this sentence helps develop the important concept that art and maths/sciences in no way exist in conflict with each other; while many believe these two subjects to be on opposite sides of an academic spectrum, this section of the Rockfish Gap Report helps to remind that art and science can freely interact and engage with each other to work for the benefit of both.

How is his usage of "sciences" and "arts" here different (or not) from "technology"? In other words, to what extent is he saying that instrumental developments in science and art are the result of new technology?

He explicitly describes technological advances like the microscope, telescope, and mariner's needle, but can the other developments be attributed to technology in more implicit (but nonetheless important) ways?

Site on pre-Renaissance Muslim contributions to knowledge. https://twitter.com/HeritageMuslim

I find the realm of data science, and particularly data visualisation, really interesting in this context. Visual renderings of complex data sets can bridge the divide between art and science, while also requiring a certain, new, literacy in order to decipher and decode them. At the same time, increasingly we see these aesthetics in museums and galleries, co-opted by 'art' proper: http://o-c-r.org/portfolio/listening-post/

https://vimeo.com/59622009