>>13766179The scientific method, combined with our existing body of science and engineering literature IS "art". They call mathematics, astronomy, etc. the "arts" for a reason, even historically, when it was, "if it's not a 'craft', it's an art". During those times, those arts were considered USEFUL to society, and crafts could even be elevated to arts once they could be studied in their own right. The most popular method for elevating crafts is science, and thus science is the craft-elevating art. Using knowledge combined with intuition to put soles on shoes is a true art. Someone who masters it is called an engineer (or at least a "designer") and the study of shoe soles can be perfected with science. Understanding intuitively the nuances of perception and human experiences to create a song or other depiction is true art that, in principle, can ascend into engineering and be perfected with science. Think sound engineering and the psychology of perception, esp. tri-color theory of vision: it's already happening, albeit in relatively narrow fields.
Pure (((Art))), on the other hand, is just what faggots who don't know how to apply the scientific method call the garbage they produce, or alternatively, social and emotional dynamics they are foolish enough to think can't have a number assigned to. Doing a thing without knowing what the fuck you're doing or why you're doing it or what even the fuck you were thinking, without any consideration for the benefits, is not useful in its own right, and is thus not art.
Nobody would consider a homeless man's insane rambling's "art" for this reason, nor should we entertain degenerates and their (((Art))).
