In the case of the Arts and Science, there are times when the two disciplines are not meant to cross as could be shown by the non-overlapping sections of two circles in a Venn diagram.
Take, for example, the following illustration of this point:
In the arts, wouldn’t an artistically expressive performance be more appealing to you, as an audience member, than would a bland yet technically proficient performance. Agree?
Mathematically expressed, this could look like this:
Eq. 1) Artistry > Technical Proficiency.
In Marketing of the Arts, if you as an artist had to make the choice, you would be better served to improve your marketing ability than to improve your artistry skills, otherwise you’d be a starving artist unable to continue pursuing your craft. Correct?
Eq. 2) Marketing Ability > Artistry.
Yet, when learning, teaching, or for decision-making, you want factual accuracy (technical proficiency), not creative interpretation of the facts to the point of factual inaccuracy. True? Let’s express this as:
Eq. 3) Technical Proficiency > Artistry and/or Marketing.
So, we’ve come full circle here. You see, if my argument and the equations above are logically sound, then this proves that there is a time and a place when the Arts and Science should not overlap.
While I believe in the importance and value of creativity, there still do exist occasions, such as in Politics, when it would be absolutely appropriate to have a button that you could pin out there that stated: “No Creativity Allowed Here!” Wouldn’t you agree?