Blog 8

• Part 1: 

Part 2: Summary

Jonah Lehrer’s main argument throughout this paper is that the sciences and arts need to work together to create a better understanding of scientific discoveries. He argues that scientists often look too deep into concepts rather than taking broader views. Sometimes, it’s the ideas and inspirations of a piece of art that allow us to question and understand why something may be the way it is. Or, it can just simply help us to better explain what we are already imagining, just as Bohr with the cubist paintings. What Lehrer tends to argue most is how metaphors, which were recently discussed in class, have an effect in how we understand something. Despite having two separate things, they make a second reality between their similarities. While some may argue that this can be dangerous, Lehrer continues to explain that if scientists are to work with artists to come up with better metaphors, then they won’t turn out to be as dangerous as one may believe. Lehrer also argues that the brains complicated sections may never be understood scientifically. He argues, and I agree, that when someone reads a novel, or poem, that they are more likely to understand how someone is feeling, what’s going on in their brain, and why. In conclusion, there’s need to be a “fourth culture” in which there is no gap between a scientists and artists communication. Instead, they should work together as one to explain theories, and create better questions that need to be answered.

Part 3: Glossing the Text

1. Reductionism – Analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon in terms of phenomena that are held to represent a simpler level, especially when this is said to provide a sufficient explanation. (Dictionary)
2. Epiphenomenon – A secondary effect that arises from but does not causally influence a process. (Dictionary)
3. Holistic perspective –  A perspective in which many different factors are taken into account to generate a picture of the culture as a whole (Study.com)