a great day of presentations at the Nano event for the
Cambridge festival of imagination. our team decided to have questions
within the presentation which led to us reading out a set of questions - it
went very well and the questions led to more questions which was the point of
the whole issue for me. enabling a rethinking of my practice. here's a link to
the presentation - http://www.slideshare.net/l.bicknell/what-if-its-true-after-all?related=1
and here's the script.
1 When discussing nano does understanding falter
because it's smaller than I can represent with my own body?
1 - Does having to conceive of
something as an idea in my mind limit my understanding of it?
2 - Do we need to train our brains to
become better at discussing and understanding things that we can’t see?
3 - are really small things just very
frightening?
2 what is the
purpose of the experiment?
1 - Do we create knowledge or is it all
out there waiting to be discovered?
2 - Does the concept of a failed
experiment actually exist? How can I use
this idea with the students I teach?
3 - Is there is such a thing as a
stupid experiment where no knowledge is created?
3 How are artists
and scientists bound by givens in their perception of the world?
1 - Are scientists trying to work with
physical things that exist but can't be seen and artist's trying to make
physical things based on concepts that can't be seen?
2 - On the whole, do givens help or
hinder progress in science?
3 - Is it true to say givens are more
common place in science than in art?
4 what is the relationship between perception and
belief?
1 - To build a
foundation to work on do scientists have to believe in the existence of
phenomena they cannot see to develop a practice? what is the
role of belief?
2 - What is the role of perception?
3 - If there is strong evidence for a
phenomena can it still be considered ‘beliefs’?
5 What is the role of intention?
1 - What is the role of trust in the
creative process?
2 - Can chance encounters occur in both
cases?
3 - Can science or art be done without
the intention to do so? Does this make them different?
6 can
babies do science?
1 - can one just start doing science
without knowledge?
2 - can one just start doing art
without knowledge?
3 - what is the role of post rational
thought within progress?
7 Is
there a personal language of science?
1 - art is concerned with creating an
individual, personal language - does science need to have a shared
language to progress? - or is it all a universal language?
2 - Mathematics is often described as
the language of the universe, how does this differ to a personal language in
science?
3 - when we share words do we really
understand each other?
8 Do we have a
certain perception convention within particular fields?
1 - Coming into contact with the
language of science and thinking has introduced new phrases to my own practice
and enabled me to rethink ones I thought I understood - how will I use this?
2 - to what extent does this shared
language within fields help or hinder progress?
3 - Does all the science within a particular field have the same
language?
9 what makes an
outcome an outcome?
1 - How do we perceive an outcome?
2 - when do we know when to stop?
3 - is reflective thinking just post rational
cover up?
10 how can
something that is so wrong be so right?
1 - what is the importance of closed minds?
2 - Is it really true that if you don't know how it works it's not
science?
3 - What has bad science got to teach good art?
11 Does science
need to start with the knowledge of many?
1 - where does art begin and science
end?
2 - does 'the community' endorse which
knowledge is valued?
3 - Can new science or art be achieved
without the knowledge of many?
12 There is a wider
audience for the outcomes of what can be made from science but do scientists
have an audience other than themselves to enable them to think and deduct?
1 - is science too closed to be
understood by the general public?
2 - Are we just selfish beings who want
to feel like we have a meaning or purpose?
3 - is art too easy to dismiss? is art
too closed to be understood by the general public?
13 Are there
parallels between the craft skills of art and those of science?
1– Does the knowledge of how to do things - the skill and craft of
making enable scientists to make? 2 - Can art be created without the
acquisition of skills?
3 - is there a craft to thinking?
14 How do the
clothes we work in support thinking?
1 - can ritual and uniform create a
heightened awareness of one's activity?
2 - does uniform constrict creativity
and result in increased conformity to established ideas?
3 - How do the spaces we work in support
thinking?
15 Everything
we see may not be there or at least not as we think it is - where is our starting
point?
1 - Bottom-up or top-down? When is either more appropriate and how
do we know?
2 - where do we go for the answers?
3 - how do the tools we use to see alter our perspective on what
we see?
16 Is there a
shelf-life on what is true?
1 - How do we work with truths?
2 - truth is an expensive word, can we
use it with any certainty
3 - how do we know?
17 What is the role of ‘external forces’ on
creativity?
1 –Does the engagement of art and
science with business support or mold what the work becomes and where it goes.
2 - Does this then start to define what
is researched or made and eventually defines what art or science is?
3 - has the learning outcome destroyed creativity in education?
18 What makes something meaningful?
1 - Is art a way of making sense of the world?
2 - Is science a way of making sense of the world?
3 - are we all just
making tools for thinking?
19 What should I work on next?
1 - How do I know what to do next? How
do I know what is right?
2- Is the process of deciding what to
do next on the whole more regimented in science than in art?
3 - Does it all depend on what everyone
else is doing?
20 This needs a question here
