[Histonet] Art vs Science
Wiese, Jason VHAROS
Jason.Wiese <@t> va.gov
Mon Feb 5 10:54:35 CST 2007
I agree... all it takes to be a great scientist is a sharp mind and an
analytical personality. To be an artist requires a passion for what you
I don't think anyone was slamming you by calling you an artist. Rather,
it was obvious to them, you take pride in your work. We are artists in
the sense we become more skilled with time. We are artists in the sense
not everyone can do what we do to the same degree of excellence.
My 2 cents...
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 8:42 AM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Art vs Science
At 10:12 AM -0500 2/5/07, Pat Flannery wrote:
>Personally, I can think of no greater compliment to a scientist than
>that his or her work is beautiful.
Whenever I have made that comment, I have meant it as a compliment. I
would certainly rather be considered an artist than a scientist,
But, 'art' implies creativity, and while I encourage creativity in my
technicians and in myself, the #$%@ bureaucraps and regulators do
everything in their power to stamp it out. They are the priests of
Of course all of this is meaningless unless we understand 'art' and
'science' in the same way as individuals.
Bill Blank, MD
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
More information about the Histonet