For artists & natural scientists which is more important what can be explained or what cannot be explained?

Aristotle made a famous remark on knowledge: "Men do not believe they know something until they understand the "why" behind it". This implies that it is in our nature to justify our inquisitiveness in an effort to understand what cannot be explained. However, this conjures the questions: does everything have the potential to be explained and how does it vary between each AOK? Understanding this prompt's key terms helps set parameters for a more accurate response. What can be explained refers to the clarification of knowledge and its justification as to why the knowledge behaves as such. Knowledge can be interpreted in a variety of ways by different audiences through their logical means via cognitive thought, experiments and observations. This means what can be explained should be a collective argument between multiple parties that such knowledge can be accounted for without the presence of bias or assumptions. In this essay, the importance of the explained and the unexplained is decided based on which will have the greatest impact on human society.

In natural sciences, what can be explained refers to the provened hypothesis derived from empirical evidence and their previous understanding of established laws and theories which have been supported by the greater scientific community. Scientists always use the scientific method through the form of data collection, theory, hypothesis and experiment that's repeated until they can objectively conclude on whether to reject or accept the claim.  As the scientific method is standardised, claims can be limited to be either right or wrong, eliminating the possibility of subjectivity. Subjectivity is unfavoured by the scientific community as it diminishes the justification of proof towards factual knowledge - knowledge that does not fluctuate in opinion but is true in all circumstances. Within experimentation, consistent results provide scientists a degree of accuracy, where if this experiment were to be repeated again, it's understood that the same results will always appear. Hence, this knowledge can be explained to an extent, which is acceptable at a societal level. This can be seen with the positive correlation between anthropogenic causes, and rising carbon emissions, where human activities such as fossil fuel burning are all direct evidence that contribute to global warming and climate change. Although there are external factors such as volcanic activity, solar output etc, there are specialised scientific instruments to create a control so that we can single out human caused levels of climate change. Thus, the explained for natural sciences depends heavily on the scientific method of observation, accuracy and common agreement which are all features that can be easily repeated. This has allowed human civilization to flourish as we can develop science based on prior knowledge while also discovering new concepts.

The unexplained in natural sciences is mostly a matter of time, where I believe most phenomena can be eventually explained in this AOK, albeit at different periods. This is because current technology and resources are not advanced enough for scientists to turn the unexplained to explained for certain theories or concepts. Hence, what cannot be explained is what drives scientific development as scientists are consistently unsatisfied with the knowledge they currently possess. Even if the results illustrate a trend following the scientific method, scientists still will continue to seek more experimentation to further understand and confirm the phenomena. However, if an experiment provides widely different results which indicates an unknown variable to scientists, this will be extremely beneficial as it poses new questions to be answered. Within the scientific community, questions are essential as it's what motivates continuous research to discover new knowledge or expand on existing theories. If something is unexplained in natural sciences, a hypothesis is created based on the question to propose a tentative explanation for a phenomenon observed in the natural world. Dark matter, for example, is a hypothetical phenomenon, where its incomprehensiveness, had led to an advancement in astrophysics, namely the big bang theory, the age of the universe, and formation of galaxies. Although we do not currently have the technology nor the resources to fully understand and explain dark matter, its impact on society has been essential to comprehend our universe. Nevertheless, some things may never have the potential to be explained as data interpretation is limited by the human capacity to comprehend the results. This does not detach scientists from abandoning a claim, it only renders them to search for new evidence. This is why most scientists come up with educated theories instead of calling them proofs as scientists always leave room for the unexplainable. As curiosity motivates scientists, what cannot be explained advances our comprehension of the universe, and we chase after the unexplainable in hopes of turning it into the explainable.

What can be explained within the arts can be tied to the artist's intention behind the piece and how the artist chooses to display this to their target audience. Some may argue that the intended knowledge or ‘truth’ behind the art should only be dependent on the vision of the artist as they hold more authority than others. One could argue that the level of success of explanation in art is related to the level of communication that the artist manages to convey. Although individuals receive the work differently, there’re common elements that we perceive at a primitive level and before any kind of rational interpretation. Symbolism, colours and themes are tools that an artist can use to attempt to ‘explain’ their own meaning to the audience. The aforementioned tools will reflect the artist's own life experiences and logical, emotional and philosophical contexts. For instance, historic paintings - the origin,  meaning  and interpretation of this artform are concrete and explainable to a degree as it contextualises the Renaissance era and are inherently linked to this historical period. Hence, the audience can learn about past cultures and traditions through this visual portrait, as it's easier to portray something rather than use words, allowing the creator to illustrate a message that may be deemed more profound or controversial in nature. Artworks can provide a ‘truthful’ glimpse into someone else's life by understanding the origins of the piece - how it comes into being, its significance, and how it relates to the audience’s life - to build their self-awareness. Art is an expression of truth and beliefs and thus, these explanations educate us to develop a deeper cultural appreciation among new generations.

When discussing what cannot be explained for artists, the main thing to consider is that art is often based on the personalised and subjective interpretation of a viewer. Although, art is used to help explain the artists' emotions, experiences or thoughts through visual terms. One could argue that intention is just as significant as interpretation, as explanation always requires a conceiver and a perceiver. Because not everyone possesses the same deduction system or beliefs and values, this makes it difficult to comprehend an artist's intention. Abstract art, for example, encourages the audience to interpret from their own standpoint whilst providing some symbolism in terms of various shapes or colour, so that people are able to assign physical objects to intangible ideas such as happiness and anger. Because abstraction moves away from the realistic depiction of the recognizable, it deliberately objects to all the norms we've been taught to accept. Nonetheless, this artform is still regarded as fascinating and entertaining as even though it's not explicitly illustrating a vision or outline of a tangible object, it allows the audience to enjoy the freedom to assign their own meaning to the work, whilst having an impact on that individual. This is important as it teaches people to accept the curse of the unknown and thus, artists are not compelled to explain the rationale behind their works but instead give their audience the room to ‘explain’ the unexplainable by seeking the truth through the emotive and aesthetic aspects of the art form. This is how the audience benefits from artists. Since the background, beliefs and values of the audiences vary greatly due to nature and nurture, as one experiences an art piece, their subjective interpretation would interact with the intended communicative methods of the artists to create a whole new meaning (that the artist might not have originally planned). Unique personal experiences and emotions allows the audience to undergo personal growth and broaden their perspective as they subjectively perceive any art piece.

When we talk about which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained, I believe the explained is the most important as to establish a foundation, yet the unexplained should not be completely disregarded as it stimulates scientific curiosity. With the existence of pre-existing knowledge, scientists can better relate and compare their results with scientific explanation to draw a logical conclusion whether to accept or reject their hypothesis. Despite the fact that scientists can establish a certain degree of accuracy in their theories and rules, proof is not always present. Every scientific theory has a provisional aspect; this does not render the "explanation" superfluous, but knowledge must be clarified via experimental and observations and a logical conclusion must be derived through collective agreement to eliminate the presence of biases of assumptions. Whereas within the arts, I believe the explained is equally as important as the unexplained, as a work is only as important as what it means to the observer. Though the author's intent is significant, the audience’s subjectivity is also required for the art to take full effect. However, we must be pragmatic in our evaluation and recognise the discussion of the explained and unexplained is a perfect representation of the duality of human nature, as they are interlinked to form human experience.

artincontext. “Why Is Art Important? - a Holistic Investigation into the Importance of Art.” Artincontext.org, 26 July 2021, artincontext.org/why-is-art-important/#:~:text=Art%20helps%20with%20human%20development.

Harris, Kerri-Lee. What Science Means for Australian Society a Background in Science a Background in Science What Science Means for Australian Society. Apr. 2012.

“Is Everything in Science Just a Theory?” Quora, 2022, www.quora.com/Is-everything-in-science-just-a-theory. Accessed 8 Dec. 2022.

Martin, Gary. ““A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words” - the Meaning and Origin of This Phrase.” Phrasefinder, 2019, www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/a-picture-is-worth-a-thousand-words.html.

“Scientific Method Limitations.” Www.askaboutireland.ie, www.askaboutireland.ie/learning-zone/secondary-students/science/biology/scientific-method/scientific-method-limitat/.

“The Plumb-Pudding in Danger.” Age of Revolution, ageofrevolution.org/200-object/the-plumb-pudding-in-danger/.

“Understanding Abstract Art: An Art Collector’s Guide.” The Artling, theartling.com/en/artzine/abstract-art-buyers-guide/#:~:text=This%20is%20because%20abstract%20art.

“Why Backgrounds Are Important in Art.” Online Art Lessons, onlineartlessons.com/tutorial/why-backgrounds-are-important-in-art/. Accessed 8 Dec. 2022

Wikipedia Contributors. “A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 4 Nov. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_picture_is_worth_a_thousand_words.