Paul Nurse Quotes

Art is the imposing of a pattern on experience, and our aesthetic enjoyment is recognition of the pattern.

The great poems are not about experience, but are the experience itself, felt in the body.

What is important, then, is not that the critic should possess a correct abstract definition of beauty for the intellect, but a certain kind of temperament, the power of being deeply moved by the presence of beautiful objects.

Looking back on my 50-year eclectic journey in research, I am grateful that it has gone as well as it has, although still not clever enough to open the black box of enzyme structure.

From my earliest days, I was fascinated by science.

I'd like to put in a vote for the intrinsic fascination of science.

One would have to have completely forgotten the history of science so as to not remember that the desire to know nature has had the most constant and the happiest influence on the development of mathematics.

Science as an intellectual exercise enriches our culture, and is in itself ennobling.

The aim of all commentary on art now should be to make works of art - and, by analogy, our own experience - more, rather than less, real to us. The function of criticism should be to show how it is what it is, even that it is what it is, rather than to show what it means.

What is art but a way of seeing?

When it comes to art and science, people don't like a lot of either. Instead of being open to it, they're closed off about it.

I was interested in science before I even knew what science was.

I just like art. I get pure pleasure from it. I have a lot of wonderful paintings, and every time I look at them I see something different.

The lives of those such as Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein are plainly of interest in their own right, as well as for the light they shed on the way these great scientists worked. But are 'routine' scientists as fascinating as their science? Here I have my doubts.

Great art - or good art - is when you look at it, experience it and it stays in your mind. I don't think conceptual art and traditional art are all that different.

I read science, because to me, that's extremely exciting. It's like a great detective story, and it's happening right in front of us.

Scientific facts are often described in textbooks as if they just sort of exist, like nickels someone picked up on the street. But science at the cutting edge, conducted by sharp minds probing deep into nature, is not about self-evident facts. It is about mystery and not knowing. It is about taking huge risks.

No great artist ever sees things as they really are. If he did, he would cease to be an artist.

I am among those who think that science has great beauty.

Understanding science and pushing the boundaries of science is what makes me immensely satisfied.

That's really the whole point of art - it's to take something commonplace and draw people on a path so that, all of a sudden, they have a new impression of everything around them.

It is understandable that people want to know how it affects them. But as a scientist, I would hope society would be equally interested in fundamental science.

It's a blessing in a scientific career - the almost daily thrill of scientific discovery.

Scientists tend to come in two stripes: those who have tremendous appetite and aptitude for the details, and those who illuminate the big picture. Sagan was definitely in the latter category, and he was profoundly good at it. He made connections that others did not have the intellectual breadth or courage to make.

The sciences, even the best,-mathematics and astronomy,-are like sportsmen, who seize whatever prey offers, even without being able to make any use of it.