|
. . . it may be said that neither
the proclamations
of those who work in what are traditionally termed sciences as to the
essentially
artistic nature of their activity, or the proclamations of those far fewer
who work in what are traditionally termed the arts and humanities as to
the appropriateness or necessity of scientific method in their activity,
need be cited to discredit an already indefensible dichotomy or multichotomy,
the perpetuation of a linguistic fortuity as if it embodied a fundamental
and persistent truth. Whatever such categorizations, if any, of fields
of intellectual creation are justified or fruitful must await an investigation
which is not even yet begun . . .
Milton Babbitt
|