Maira Monteiro Froes

This article develops some of the many ways in which Leonardo and Descartes, throughout the prolific period of human valuation from the fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries, seem to have approached and anchored their seminal contributions on the Cartesian body and metaphysical mind. While Leonardo masterfully developed an iterative thinking system of visual design applied to nature and artifacts, Descartes laid the groundwork for methodical critical thinking in dimensions that ironically ranged from dreams to the controlled narrative, from a deceptive body to a rational man. In an interdisciplinary articulation of historical and neurobiological leanings, contemporary concepts of the cognitive emotional brain, led by Damasio as the basis for his conclusions about the "Descartes Error", as well as a torrent of growing evidence that supports high cognitive abilities in associative processes mediated by action/body lead us to a re-evaluation today of the legacies of Leonardo and Descartes, rescuing a scientific mind/brain/body process that underlies the human mastering of a universal technology of discourse that would revolutionize science.

This report summarizes our preliminary efforts to delineate, at controlled experimentation, the impact of art, and artistic aesthetics, on the way we assess science. Our results suggest that the analytic-synthetic axis of perceptual cognitive handling of the scientific object is unaffected by its artistic non-conventional contextualization, while cognitive abstraction, positive emotions and aesthetic impressions are favoured. Implications to philosophical foundations of the Cartesian scientific method are considered.

I see art as the most efficient technological field for triggering human imagination. I am not alone in my conviction that human imagination has the potential to feed back to arts and science in creative and transforming ways, as does to every humanconceived technology. More than progress, breakthroughs depend on it. A virtually unlimited conceptual hybridization from dramatically distinct knowledge fields is markedly attainable in the present day through use of an art we experience as growingly immaterial and distributed. As claimed by Roy Ascott (2006), the deep significance of this experience is only achieved when a sort of technological intermingling dissolves artwork and observer into a moistmedia that takes the form of a hybrid conscious body. Would the same be true for science? In addressing this question, a first step is to recognize that there is more to the scientific process of thinking and creative conception than mere cognition (as defined by neuroscience); it also parallels artistic processes. Importantly, both artists and scientists operate at levels of subjacent realities. What would be the implications to scientific practice if, instead of romantic, essentially subjective, speculative guesses, we prove scientifically that subjective processes potentiate science? The present article proclaims the centrality of this question as a transforming demand to contemporary neuroscience. Moreover, it reverberates Roy Ascott’s proposition of the brain as an access system – a ‘moistmedia informer’. In this article, hybrid artsci labs are proposed as systems that favour aesthetic rapture at different stages of scientific practices. A conceptualization of scientific objects – either material or immaterial – in contemporary art is central in this model. Artsci labs are essentially conceived as providing for interdigitating scientific, artistic and brain technological paradigms, and the effects on cognitive handling through directly controlled technical evaluation is presented. Results from my lab give support to Ascott’s proposition of an art development informed by the brain. Moreover, the hybrid multimodal character of the artwork returns to science as a gain in abstraction, favouring the idea of contemporary art as a speculum of knowledge resonances, while potentiating intuitive conceptual reframing and associative thinking usually detected as insights.