[Histonet] Art vs Science

[Wiese, Jason VHAROS]

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
do.

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...

JW

-----Original Message-----
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, 
better both.

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 
mediocrity.

Of course all of this is meaningless unless we understand 'art' and 
'science' in the same way as individuals.

-- 
______________
Bill Blank, MD
Heartland Lab

_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet