Why were artists, architects, and scientists eager to embrace the ideas of the Scientific Revolution?Why were artists, architects, and scientists were eager to embrace the ideas of the Scientific...

Why were artists, architects, and scientists eager to embrace the ideas of the Scientific Revolution?

Why were artists, architects, and scientists were eager to embrace the ideas of the Scientific Revolution?

4 Answers | Add Yours

litteacher8's profile pic

litteacher8 | High School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

Creative people love new ideas. That's the first reason that artists and scientists would be eager to embrace the ideas of a Scientific Revolution. Each new theory and technology was another chance to explore a new idea. One innovation usually leads to another.
auntlori's profile pic

Lori Steinbach | High School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

The Scientific Revolution was embraced by the artistic as well as the scientific communities because of the principles of rationalism it espoused.  That scientists found this movement energizing is not particularly surprising; however, the artists and architects doing so may surprise some.  It shouldn't.  While these are both creative pursuits, they rely on rationality, patterns, and thinking to express that creativity.  The reference above to Leonardo Da Vinci is a perfect example of creativity within the parameters of rational thought. 

lrwilliams's profile pic

lrwilliams | College Teacher | (Level 1) Educator

Posted on

I would have to agree with the above post, I am not sure the artists would have embraced the scientific revolution. That being said you have to look at some of these artists were also scientists. Look at DaVinci and some of his work outside of art.

akannan's profile pic

Ashley Kannan | Middle School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

I can see how the architects and scientists were eager to embrace the ideas of the Scientific Revolution.  Part of this resided in the idea that science and rationality would guide how individuals functioned and how vocations would be guided.  No longer would there be an nonspecific and vague notion of consciouness.  Rather, it would be the ideas of science and rational thought, with tested out hypotheses, as well as projections based on reasonable assumptions that defined one's state of being in the world.  For architects, this meant that success could be replicated in different forms, so long as the successful principles in operation were evident.  For scientists, their mode of appropriating the world would be the foundation for all others.  Where I end up finding a bit of divergence with the question would be the issue of the artists. I think that part of my bias here is that the Romantic thinkers did such a number on making art a subjective experience, and the artist a voice of this subjective consciousness, that I could not see how the artists would be willing to embrace tha ideas and ideals of the scientific revolution.  It seems to me that the artists might not be so inclined to the embracing of the scientific revolution because its principles would be applied to art, as well, decreasing the value of the subjective in the face of the objective.

We’ve answered 318,944 questions. We can answer yours, too.

Ask a question