I was watching this video clip at work because, well, (full disclosure) I had to. But they bring up an interesting topic on the nature of genius. Video clip below:
Video Clip from this year’s World Science Festival (Sorry for the link, but you can blame wordpress’ war on embedded, non-youtube media for that).
Is there a difference between artistic and scientific geniuses? And why are scientific geniuses so readily accepted as such by their peers while many artists are recognized posthumously? Are artists just tougher on each other? Philip Glass comments in another part of the program that it seems like scientific geniuses tend to create their magnum opus at a very young age and then drop off (hilariously to the chagrin of du Sautoy), while artists slowly build towards a body of work that exemplifies them as such.
What do you think? How is such a subjective term decided? As skeptics, do we share geniuses from the art/science pool, or do you think we have some specifically of our own?
The ART Inquisition (or AI) is a question posed to you, the Mad Art Lab community. Look for it to appear Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays at 3pm ET.