Paradox about science and art

Paradox about science and art

Wu Yu

Taiyan Network Studio

 

To be honest, I have never thought too much about the difference and connection between science and art over the years. In the impression, Einstein was a scientific man who knew the violin very well, and his wife Qian Xuesen was a professor of music. I also remember that some artists do not understand arithmetic, and scientists do not feel anything about art. That's all.

I recently read many management books to realize the essential difference between science and art. The most common words are "Management Science" and "Management Art", which seem to be both management and actually a lot worse. Also, I have heard of "art of leadership", but I have never heard of "Science of Leadership". It can be seen that the matter of leadership is still at a certain distance from science.

From an academic point of view,Science refers to repeated practices or rules.For example, the gravity acceleration I tested here should be consistent with the one you tested. In the same time and space environment, the temperature and humidity we measured respectively should be consistent.Another scientific expression is quantifiable or tends to be quantified.For example, a person's height is 1.75, rather than being described as high or generally high. Although my statement is not 100% accurate, it is basically this trend.

Art is characterized by ambiguity and uncertainty.You think it's beautiful. I just can't see it. It's also normal. It may also be a piece of work that you think is good. Similarly, I write with a brush, but I don't want to give it to anyone. It's hard to find the work of masters of calligraphy. That is to say, the results of the same initial conditions are very different. The art of leadership means that under the leadership of a, this group of people will be able to achieve a career. If they are changed to B, they will only be inner. According to scientific standards, since they are the same group of people, they should have nothing to do with the leaders. According to art, the soldiers will be in a nest.

 

The true difference between science and art lies in the process.In terms of science, the process must be predictable and controllable. Otherwise, the conclusion must be different. In the same cup of water, I used one minute to draw a conclusion that it was 500 ml. You used half a year and then told me it was 0 mL, and said that I was not sure about the measurement, it's strange that I'm not crazy!

Playing chess is essentially a logical operation, but it becomes an art because there are no two identical game boards. Because the process is fundamentally different, the conclusion is quite different.

 

Turning art into science is a challenge. In fact, management is constantly striving in this direction, hoping to turn the art of management into management science. It should be said that companies like KFC and Coca-Cola have done a good job in this respect, and it is indeed not easy to ensure that so many production units produce foods and drinks with the same taste. The change in production quality is actually too easy. Ensure that the production quality of a product remains unchanged for many years because they have achieved absolute control over the production process.

The real difficulty of management is that the process is uncontrollable or difficult to control.The so-called "a hundred-year-old store depends on Culture" refers to the convergence of thinking and behavior patterns under the same cultural atmosphere, thus ensuring the process similarity or consistency to some extent.

 

One way to control the process is to break down the process in order to control the Unit, so as to control the unit combination.In the current situation, this is not 100% controllable, because the quality of the completed unit may still be different, but the effect will be much better.

Turning art into science comes from the discovery and summarization of laws.