I just realized why I like science over the arts. Its mostly because with science the accomplishments are direct and simple to state. Whether it is an experiment in the lab, a calculation or something you’ve build that works, you get a direct feeling of having accomplished something real and forever. Whilst with the arts like organizational or social, the accomplishments are not so easy to point out and might take a while to form and be recognized. I think there was some philosophical theory posing that a man is defined by its actions thus making a man of science more definable then a man of arts. I feel more comfortable being easy to define and thus having a clear sense of progress (an accumulation of accomplishments). Maybe my view changes over the years but for know I am still eager to accomplish something big that would echo my definition in the century’s to come. Most scientific accomplishments live forever, we unfortunately don’t.

So after reading what I wrote, I realized accomplishments sounds like an ego trip however that is not the case. The core driver behind scientific accomplishments is basic curiosity answering questions and challenges (why..?, how..?) every answer found is another step/action/accomplishment forward with the ultimate goal to have satisfied your curiosity. I can imagine life after that becomes rather dull  (just like a magic trick that loses its power once revealed how it works) or frustrating (Knowing why and how something happens but also knowing you can’t ever control it).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s