At present, science has been developing at a high speed, but people still have a high opinion of artists. What can the arts tell us of the life that science cannot?

Nowadays, it is true that human-being lives in the advancement of science. While many people think that science has an authority to dictate what is art. Others argue opposites that science tells nothing about arts. In this essay, I would discuss both views whereby science does not provide an answer.

First of all, Science helps humans to understand the world within, in the recent time, art. The first axioms that science holds is objectivity that leads to correct prediction about phenomena; there are numerous researches which conduct to find data and to analyze art's object. In Indonesia, Borneo Island in particular, scientists are found a sculpture that has similar characteristics with other sculptures around the world such as Malaysia, Australia and Africa. The attributes of the sculpture are almost identical: shape, color, and size. On the other discovery, researchers are found similar things that can apply to art's object in general such as painting. They conclude from these facts, arts have universal values which people around the world share similarities.

However, there are several disagreements about arts and sciences roles in human life. First, sciences and arts are in the equal positions that try to bring meaning into life. Science is lack of subjectivity that makes science so different from arts. To understand painting, human will refers the answer from his/her perspective and will not referring to universal law that science has. Moreover, arts can produce happiness from their enthusiast. For instance, photographer who sees identical picture with different angle can feel different satisfaction. The effects, when face unpredictable phenomenon, make art different from science.

All in all, although science has broader implication to define how we are and how we predict future, it has little influence for obtaining happiness itself.