Difference between Science and Art. 7 



bound forward with astonishing speed." Look at 

 the art of taking portraits ; for hundreds of years 

 it remained entirely in the hands of oil and water- 

 colour painters with but little progress in rapidity of 

 production, but directly science was applied to it in 

 the form of photography, its advance in this respect 

 became amazing. Fifty years ago photography was 

 almost unknown, but immediately Messrs. Daguerre 

 and Talbot, in 1844, made known their processes, 

 the new art began to advance, and so rapid has been 

 its progress, that at the present time many thousand 

 persons are employed in its exercise, and millions 

 of portraits have been taken with an accuracy and 

 at a cost quite beyond the reach of the old method. 



Many persons hardly know the difference between 

 science and art ; a still greater number cannot 

 readily distinguish between a concrete science and a 

 pure one ; and nearly all persons confound discovery 

 with invention. A science may be conveniently 

 denned as a collection of facts and general prin- 

 ciples which are to be learned ; an art as a collection 

 of rules which are to be followed : Art therefore is 

 applied science ; and every art also has a basis in 

 science, whether that basis has been discovered or 

 not. Scientific principles underlie not only manu- 

 facturing processes, but also sculpture, music, poetry 

 and painting. 



Discoveries differ also from inventions : a scientific 

 discovery is a newly found truth in science, which 

 in the great majority of cases is not in the form of 



