Often, perhaps because of the controversies that surround the art world and the great faith which we place in science, we assume that the purpose of the former is to alarm and the purpose of the latter is to relieve us. While this is sometimes true, myriad counterexamples demonstrate that both science and art are both meant to upset and reassure us at the appropriate moment. Let us take science first. While science often soothes mans oldest fears about his mortality by producing life-extending medicines and eliminating risks in his environment, it still must act as an alarm. A good example is global-warming. While there are many in the scientific establishment who continue to deny that man is responsible for global warming, the vast majority of environmental scientists have taken it as their responsibility to warn us of the threats our industry poses to our environment, and through it, our own survival as a species. In this case the purpose of science is clearly not to reassure us; it is to alarm, upset, and mobilizein short, to frighten people into the realization that inaction could prove disastrous. Thus we can see that sciences value is in reassuring us when it discovers solutions, and upsetting us when it discovers problems. Meanwhile, it is true that art also has the undeniable effect of upsetting us, at times. Much of the controversy over the government funding of art in the United States is centered around the fact that so many in the public find certain kinds of art obscene or overly graphicin other words, upsetting. And certainly, when art upsets us, like Goyas horrific portraits of war are meant to do, then it can lead us to question in a positive fashion our assumptions about the world. Nevertheless, art also reassures us, by providing us a place in which to enjoy beauty and tranquility. In particular, Asian art and Western Minimalist art are meant not so much to stir the passions as to provide a sense of sublime serenity in the soulanyone who has listened to a gentle Bach aria in a major key knows this. The final chords of such a piece of music assure us that everything is right in the world, that all the dissonances introduced earlier in the music have been resolved in the end. Movies and books with happy endings function on much the same principle. Art plays the role of the barbarian sometime, causing us to question our beliefs, but it also civilizes us by reinforcing our notion of moral and aesthetic ideals. Thus we cannot generalize that the value of art is to upset or to reassureoften it is both, acting in combination. Therefore, it would be erroneous to assert that art and science have only one function. We must recognize that science and art both point out problems, and they both provide solutions. As civilized beings, we have the luxury of two great allies to reassure and upset us at the moment when each of those two effects is most desired.
通常，也许因为的争议，围绕艺术世界和伟大的信仰，我们将在科学，我们假设，前者的目的是报警，后者的目的是缓解我们。虽然这有时是真实的，无数的反例表明，科学和艺术都是为了不让我们在适当的时刻。让我们先学科学。而科学往往使人最担心的延长寿命的药物消除环境风险他的死亡，它仍然必须作为一个报警。一个很好的例子是全球变暖。虽然有许多科研机构谁继续否认人是负责全球变暖，环境科学家的绝大多数已经把它作为自己的责任来警告我们我们的工业会对我们的环境造成的威胁，和通过它，我们自己的生存作为一个物种。在这种情况下，科学的目的显然是不让我们放心，它是要报警、不安、动员起来的短，让人进入到不作为的实现中，可以证明是灾难性的。因此，我们可以看到科学的价值是在安慰我们，当它发现解决方案，并使我们不安的时候，它发现问题。同时，艺术也有不可否认的影响，使我们不可忽视的影响，有时。在美国政府资助的问题上，大部分的争论是围绕着这样一个事实，即许多在公众中发现某些种类的艺术淫秽或过分的图形，使其他的话，心烦意乱。当然，当艺术使我们不安的时候，就像戈雅的可怕的战争画像，那就意味着我们可以用一种积极的方式去质疑我们对世界的假设。然而，艺术也安慰我们，为我们在享受美丽而宁静的地方。特别是，亚洲艺术和西方极简主义艺术是意味着没有那么多搅拌的激情来提供一种崇高宁静的灵魂谁听温柔巴赫咏叹调大调知道这一点。这样一块最后的音乐和弦向我们保证，在这个世界上的一切都是正确的，所有的不协和音程介绍在音乐早已解决的。具有快乐结局的电影和书籍在许多相同的原则。艺术有时是野蛮人的角色，使我们怀疑我们的信仰，但它也教化我们加强我们的道德观念和审美理想。因此，我们不能把艺术的价值概括为不安，或是让我们放心，这两者都是一种组合。因此，断言艺术与科学只有一个功能是错误的。我们必须认识到，科学和艺术都指出问题，他们都提供解决方案。作为文明的存有，我们拥有了2个伟大的盟友的奢华，在每一个效果最理想的时刻，我们都能保证和不安。