RE: Does atheism guarantee disbelief in anything unproven?
March 4, 2012 at 12:15 pm
(This post was last modified: March 4, 2012 at 12:16 pm by Tempus.)
(March 4, 2012 at 10:55 am)whateverist Wrote: Do we really think proper application of the scientific method could produce the works of Shakespeare or a Picasso painting or a work of Mozart?
The scientific method is a framework for investigation, I don't know why anyone would think it would produce art; it's purpose is to discover, not create. That being said, I don't see why science couldn't be used to inform us about art and literature. I can imagine you could even use science to figure out a way to produce states of creativity within people - that is, without pumping them full of drugs.
I quite enjoy Mozart. I remember a while back someone analysing various piano composers and creating a computer program that could create strikingly similar pieces, so much so that some couldn't tell the difference.
I can't find the original article I read (years back now) but I did find this:
http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture/tri...oser-8507/
Seems he's written a new version since which I wasn't aware of. There's even some samples there. Scientifically created music
So yes, I do think application of the scientific method could produce a work of Mozart.
