The base for technology and science, mathematics, can have yes/no answers. Art is not based on yes/no answers. It is not possible to be RIGHT in an English essay. It is not possible to be RIGHT in an art exam. With a mathematics exam it is possible to be 100% right.

John Maeda in his foreword for Processing (see previous post):

Hybrids that can fluidly cross the chasm between technology and the arts are mutations in the academic system. Traditionally, universities create technology students or art students—but never mix the two sides of the equation in the same person. During the 1990s the mutants that managed to defy this norm would either seek me out, or else I would reach out to find them myself…

These ‘mutants’ lie somewhere on the scale between technology and art. I’m naturally in the latter camp, but I want to be closer to the middle. I’ve chosen to design systems and services which make use of technology, so I need to know my platform. Technology needs ambiguity, too: as without creativity and ambiguity, a technology is an unused palette.

Image by Jared Tarbell (Complexification), made with Processing—this is rather brilliant, so look at the others.