The Arts vs Science Debate

Science may set limits to knowledge, but should not set limits to imagination.
---Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)

I am currently reading "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time" by Mark Haddon. It is, I must say an interesting piece of work, as it delves into many, and I mean, many aspects of life. It deals with change, love, loss and a whole bunch of stuff. But, it is human psychology that really draws me to the book.

The narrator is autistic, thus he views the world in a entire different way from normal people. But, in my opinion, he is not a very endearing character. His mind is extremely logical, to the extent of not appreciating anything artistic, at all. This somewhat infuriates me, being an Arts student. Many of my friends, would enjoy this book, as it is filled with weird mathematical hypotheses and what not. His chapters are also all in prime numbers, imagine that. But I do acknowledge the fact that Mark Haddon is a brilliant author, in his ability to flesh out such a believable character.

I have yet to finish the book, but one conclusion I have made is that science, despite its prevalence and usefulness, isn't the centre of the universe. Art, culture and literature have their basis in science too, and should not be neglected and tossed away. In Singapore, the humanities is said to be the easy way out or for students who are too stupid, and thus can't handle the complexities of physics and chemistry. But, as in the example of the book, science (i.e. logic) can still blend with literature to make a captivating read.