wCHAP.31

(9/19/98)

CHAPTER XXXI

ART AND A SCIENCE OF RELIGION

Copyright 1998, 2006 by Arthur M. Jackson

How can art best be incorporated into, or dealt with by a Science of Religion? To me there are no obvious answers to this question. Like all other questions it requires empirical evidence, study, and analysis. However, it seems like an area that must be addressed. In order to initiate the process I will draw from Shlain's interesting book[1]. It provides a unique point of view that undoubtedly includes some erroneous thoughts. But it has many ideas worth pondering, and should be helpful in guiding us in a worthwhile direction.

Shlain's book grew out of his efforts to make sense out of modern physics and modern art. "Perhaps, I mused, there was a connection between the inscrutability of modern art and the impenetrability of the new physics."...."My intention has been to reach artistically inclined readers who want to know more about the new physics and scientists who would like to have a framework to appreciate art." [p. 8][1].

Shlain has assembled a great deal of evidence to demonstrate that at least for the past 2,000 years science and art have moved in the same direction at roughly the same time with art usually leading the way. He takes physics as the core of science and the representative used to compare with art. It's not that there is any direct influence between individual artists and physicists. If there truly is the kind of relationship Shlain proposed there is no proved causal mechanism.

However, independent of any relationship between physics and art Shlain discusses art in a way that takes it beyond the usual manner of seeing art. For that reason he might help us to explore art in ways necessary to see how to incorporate it into a Science of Religion.