Artistic knowledge is subjective (emotional to feelings and bias) to interpretation …show more content…
The knowledge of natural science or scientific knowledge is based on facts which are gained through real experiments done in labs under proper conditions and these experiments when determined as true are labelled as facts which have a higher degree of credibility as they pass the truth test which exemplifies the reliability of facts in natural sciences. For example the idea of flow of diffraction of waves. Previously it was believed that light was a particle and it was agreed that light could not diffract But later research showed that light can diffract and it was called wave. In the end light was declared both as particle and a wave. Since two different views are provided with logical proofs through deductive reasoning we come up to a conclusion that light is both particle and wave. So logical conclusions achieved through deductive reasoning we can group the claims as facts and natural science is built upon these facts. Whereas in the arts it is not simply about organizing facts in some order. Especially paintings and sculpture where there is no use of language to convey the idea. Whereas for the art there is no structure or moreover i would go further and say artist are the people who possess free will to a large extent in the sense that they are not affected by any of the factors while creating an artwork. Also it is outlook is more humane meaning that provided the right context we can connect to it whereas for other areas of knowing it is difficult to achieve this connection. So intervention restricts the free will in natural science whereas in the arts the artist does not have any restriction imposed upon him to follow a certain list of