Art vs Science in Dostoevsky and Einstein - Essay Example

The Relationship Between Science and Art- Einstein and Dostoevsky Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Discussion Works Cited I. Introduction This paper explores the relationship between art and science through the lens of the lives and works of two great genius historical figures representing each, Fyodor Dostoevsky representing art and Albert Einstein representing science. In particular, this paper explores the contributions of Dostoevsky, through such important works as ‘The Brothers Karamazov’, to the development of the world views of Albert Einstein; the interpretations that the two men had with regard to the relationship between art and science, which overlap in many respects; and the unity of their inward philosophies. Einstein and Dostoevsky of course lived apart in terms of geography and time, with Dostoevsky having lived from 1821 to 1888, while Einstein would be more properly situated firmly in the 20th century, having lived from 189 to 1955. True, there was some overlap in their historical timelines, but this overlap is trivial in comparison to the profound impact of the thoughts and views, and the artistic vision of Dostoevsky as reflected in his important novels, chief among them ‘The Brothers Karamazov’. Einstein would of course be propelled by that influence of Dostoevsky, as well as his own gifts and talents in theoretical physics, to make unprecedented insights into the nature of the universe, including the nature of matter and energy, time, gravity, and relativity, the latter being the aspect of his work for which he garnered lasting acclaim. His insights into relativity, moreover, would be the foundation of major advances in cosmology and many other disciplines within the scientific community. One can argue that Dostoevsky’s imprint on Einstein’s views about the nature of the world was large and crucial to the way Einstein’s scientific mind blossomed and bore so much fruit during his time. 1 2 3 4 II. Discussion The gist of Dostoevsky’s contribution to the formation of the worldview of Einstein, and arguably the foundation of his scientific career and the spectacular insights and discoveries emanating from his work, is summed up in a quote attributed to the scientist, with regard to how Dostoevsky, according to Einstein, is able to provide more to Einstein in comparison to any scientist, and in particular more than what Gauss had given him. This is not a trivial quote, and can be construed as a recognition from Einstein that what Dostoevsky gave him in terms of a vision from the arts is more than what science had been able to provide him up until that point in his life. Here then is an early intimation of what the role of science and art is as can be gleaned in the life and thoughts of Einstein, that arguably the most important scientific figure of the 20th century would so consider Dostoevsky so important that his artistic vision counts for more than the work of all scientists prior to and during Einstein’s time. To say moreover that Dostoevsky is more important than Gauss is to further stress how precedent science pales in comparison to the philosophical ,artistic, and moral vision that Dostoevsky was able to provide Einstein. As Einstein admits, the value of art and philosophy, as it is embodied in the important works of Dostoevsky, far exceeds the value of all science before him. This is not a trivial statement because the work of Gauss, and indeed the work of all scientists before Einstein, constituted all that was true in science during Einstein’s time. Moreover, as a scientist, he had to stand on the outcome of the works of other scientists who came before him. Yet for all this, we have it from the mouth of Einstein that art in Dostoevsky is worth far more than all science. This is to the extent that nothing was able to provide Einstein with more. 5 In particular, Einstein was known to have elevated the work ‘The Brothers Karamazov” as being among the pinnacle achievements in all of literature, something sublime and transcendent, and with few peers in terms of its sheer genius and its insight into human nature. Of course as a piece of literature, Einstein likewise saw ‘The Brothers Karamazov’ as being an important work of art that had, indirectly and afterwards, a profound impact on Einstein’s groundbreaking theoretical work in physics. It was Einstein, for sure, through his recognition of the value of Dostoevsky’s work, who internalized the message and import of Dostoevsky’s art, so that it is not easy to discern just how much the art of Dostoevsky permeated the thinking, or prepared the soil, out of which Einstein’s scientific work would bloom. The take from the above discussion is that Einstein did not just make a passing mention of Dostoevsky and ‘The Brothers Karamazov’, but without prodding and with all seriousness attribute greatness to Dostoevsky and single out the work as worthy of being elevated above other works of literature, as something vital and important to the work of the scientist and to our understanding of our own humanity. 6 Digging deeper, one can say that there is a deep connection on the one hand between the subjective eye of Einstein, and the way Einstein used that subjectivity to recognize the artistic and philosophical genius of Dostoevsky. Looking at it from the lens of Dostoevsky meanwhile, one can also argue that in Dostoevsky the underlying voice in the novel reflected a very deep rational faculty and a very ordered and rational exposition of the lives of the Brothers Karamazov. This ordered and rational mind, looking at human nature from this lens, is something that appeals to the scientific and very rational mind of Einstein. At the same time, there is in Einstein too an implied vision of reality that takes a kind of leap of faith into something that is not reachable by rationality and by the scientific method. Like his genius in physics and his insights into the nature of reality, so too does Einstein make a leap and acknowledge the genius of Dostoevsky. One can say that in essence there are overlaps too between the rational and orderly mind of Dostoevsky and the scientific mind of Einstein. At the same time, the subjective capacity of Einstein to recognize beauty in the art and humanity of ‘The Brothers Karamazov’ intersects with that part in Dostoevsky that comprehends human nature in brilliant fashion, and creates beautiful literary pieces coming out of that comprehension of man. Still stated another way, the overlaps between Einstein and Dostoevsky is from the point of view of Einstein the capacity of both to make very brilliant insights into subjective humanity and subjective art. From the lens of Dostoevsky’s mind and work on the other hand, we see too that in Dostoevsky there is a meticulous care given to sticking to a thoroughly rigorous and rational take on human nature. Both in other words cover ground in their respective works that honor the genius and methods of the other. In other words, Einstein shows that there is a part of the scientiic mind that is receptive to art, beauty, and the subjective appreciation of humanity. On the other hand, from Dostoevsky, we see that there is room in the artistic process for a rational and clear-headed vision of man. 7 Taking a step back, we see from Einstein too that his own understanding of the work of the scientist and of the scientific mind is that the scientific effort spills over into art. To paraphrase him, Einstein is saying that the earnest application of the scientific mind naturally spills over into those areas and processes of mind that are increasingly artistic too. He says to this effect that the great scientist, approaching reality from science, likewise are great artists as well. By this he means that the one spills over into the other, and that where the scientist works in earnest, he cannot but also end up doing work that is also properly the realm of art. Technical skill, according to Einstein, when achieved to a very high and proficient level, spills over into beauty and the appreciation and beholding of beauty. These are properly areas that are in the realm of art. It is not surprising therefore that what Einstein is really saying is that, given his role in life as a scientist, he nevertheless is also an artist, as serous and as creative as any other. One can see that this is so, and that implicitly his admiration and singling out of Dostoevsky has that aspect of Einstein seeing himself as an artist, just as Dostoevsky was an artist too. The common ground between the artist and the scientist, and between art and science, is in this transitioning that occurs from a highly sincere effort at doing science spilling over into realms of art, the appreciation of beauty, and of the work output of the scientist such as Einstein assuming dimensions of art and beauty as well. 8 9 Probing deeper, Einstein saw that there is a deep relationship between art and science, in the way that the foundational processes for both are the same. Those foundational processes for doing science, to Einstein, relate not so much to rationality and the scientific method, and the large body of scientific knowledge at the disposal of the scientist, but on creativity and imagination. Those twin aspects of science for Einstein are also aspects of the artistic process. Art is also about creativity and imagination, and here Einstein is emphasizing that one can arrive at scientific knowledge, and at truth, wholly from these artistic inspirations. Hence the assertion from Einstein, that between knowledge and the imaginative faculty in man, the latter is far more important and vital. This is the same as saying that the scientist who does not rely on his intuition, on his imagination, and on his creative faculties is not a scientist, or else that scientist is very poor and incompetent indeed. Einstein understands science and the human ways of doing science as being heavily fertilized by things from the world of art- intuition and the imagination, as already discussed above. There is therefore no contradiction and no separation between the two. Art and science are not separate exercises and disciplines, because the core processes governing both are the same, and in the end both are concerned with issues of beauty and meaning. 10 Turning to Dostoevsky, as has been discussed above, the observation is that he shows rigor in the rational framework in which he wrote his works, including the Brothers Karamazov. and insofar as his works are accurate representations of the human mind and the human personality he is being rigorously exact. These are hallmarks of the scientific mind. At the same time, it is obvious from his work and from his many pronouncements on the nature of beauty and art that he is an artist first and foremost. As an artist his interest is in beauty, the human side of things, emotions, subjectivity, and human relationships, the psychology of families, and even spirituality. He does place beauty and art as being above science, as when he asserts that science would not be able to survive even for a moment without beauty, which to him takes precedence over science. In the same vein he asserted that only beauty is indispensable in the end, and science is secondary to beauty. Men can live without science according to Dostoevsky. At the same time, one can see that he draws too from the same set of faculties and internal gifts to be able to be an artist, such as the subjective comprehension of human relationships, which is largely intuitive rather than based on an application of the rational aspect of the mind. Here as in Einstein we see that where Dostoevsky concerns himself with truth and beauty, the internal processes that he employs are the same processes and turns of mind and heart that govern the highly-inspired artist. We see therefore that while it is true that Dostoevsky considers himself an artist before anything else, his vision of art does not contradict Einstein’s vision of the creative and artistic process as not being wholly separate from science. Rather they bloom from the same soil of imagination, creativity, subjectivity, and the ability to grasp beauty. 11 Elsewhere again, as has been discussed above, Dostoevsky’s drive for clarity, and for a coherent vision of humanity and his artistic work, intersect with and share common ground with the aims and the discipline of science. This again points to the common ground between science and art. The take is that though Dostoevsky considers himself first an artist, and considers beauty more important than anything else, even science, his approach and his integrity share common ground with the best scientists. 12 In both Einstein and Dostoevsky therefore, one can see a kind of unity in terms of the common approaches and in terms of the underlying philosophies that govern their visions of their work as artists and scientists. In the scientist’s placement of imagination, creativity, intuition, and intimations of beauty in a superior position relative to knowledge and the scientific process, the scientist Einstein declares himself as an artist too, with an artistic vision and an eye towards beauty. This intersects with the philosophical grounding of the artist’s work as reflected in the thoughts and the sensibilities of Dostoevsky, who imagines himself first and foremost as an artist concerned with beauty and nothing else. Moreover, though first an artist, Dostoevsky’ drive for harmony and rigorous exactness in his depiction of human nature shares many things with the sincere effort of the scientist for exactness and for clarity with regard to investigating the truth, so that in terms of intents and methods too there are overlaps between science and art. 13 14 2 3 Works Cited A&E Television Networks. “Albert Einstein Biography”. Bio. 2014. Web. 30 November 2014. Cambridge Forecast Group. “Dostoyevsky & Science: The Brothers Karamazov”. Cambridge Forecast Group Blog. 3 November 2007. Web. 30 November 2014. European Graduate School EGS. “Fyodor Dostoevsky-Biography”. The European Graduate School. 2012. Web. 30 November 2014. Goodreads. “Dostoevsky on Beauty”. Goodreads.com. 2014. Web. 30 November 2014. Gary Johnstone. “The Producer’s Story: Why Einstein Was Like Picasso”. NOVA. June 2005. Web. 30 November 2014. Jalic Inc. “Fyodor Dostoevesky”. The Literature Network. 2014. Web. 30 November 2014. Michelle Root-Bernstein and Robert Root-Bernstein. “Einstein on Creative Thinking: Music and the Intuitive Art of Scientific Imagination”. Psychology Today. 31 March 2010. Web. 30 November 2014. Nobel Media AB. “Albert Einstein Biographical”. NobelPrize.org. 2014. Web. 30 November 2014. Diane Thompson. “Poetic Transformations of Scientific Facts in Brat’ja Karamazovy”. Dostoevsky Studies/International Dostoevsky Society. 1987. Web. 30 November 2014. FyodorDostoevsky.com. “The Brilliant Russian”. FyodorDostoesky.com. n.d. Web. 30 November 2014. Fyodor Dostoevsky. The Brothers Karamazov. eBookEden.com/Google Books. 1967. Web. 30 November r2014. Read More