Science and art are among the most important disciplines in the present day world (Buczynski et al. 29). Science refers to the practical and intellectual activity, which often encompass the systematic investigation of the behavior along with the structure of the natural and physical world through experiment and observation. On the other hand, art is the application or the expression of human creative imagination or skill, which occurs through a visual form, producing works that are to be appreciated primarily for emotional or beauty power. Each discipline has a range of concepts. In science, good examples of such concepts include the superior wharf hypothesis, deductive and inductive reasoning, and paradigm among others. In art, some of the concept used include feminist movements and art paradigm (Moloney 31). As the paper will attempt to show, the relationship between concepts and conclusions in both art and science is a complex issue.

As established in the introductory part of the paper, one of the concepts in science is the superior wharf hypothesis. The model, developed by Benjamin Lee Whorf and Edward Sapir, holds out that the structure of language tends to determine or influence the modes of not only thought but also behavior characteristics of the culture in which that particular language is used. There are several sub-elements contained in this hypothesis. Foremost is the linguistic relativity. According to the theory, the structural differences that exist between different languages are usually paralleled by non-linguistic cognitive differences. For example, the number, as well as, the type of the basic color words of a certain language tends to determine how a person from that language sees a certain object. The second sub-concept is linguistic determinism. According to the superior wharf hypothesis theory, the structure of a given language has the potential to influence the worldview of a person in a strong way. Worldview refers to the integral and a consistent sense of existence and at the same time, it tends to provide a theoretical framework to assist in the generation, sustainability and the application of knowledge. The third sub-concept is arbitrariness.

According to the theory, the semantic systems of varied languages usually vary in the absence of constraints. For instance, for every rainbow spectrum’s decomposition, there is a high possibility that a natural system of color words will take place. Another example that shows the way in which languages shape the way people behave and think is the use of words. Take an instance of the Punjabi word “Joot.” When translated into English, the word means impure, with germs or not clean. Regardless of the number of definitions that one attempts to construct, it follows that the world cannot be translated into its full meaning. Such a context brings up the idea that language exist as a relative element, which necessarily means that the same word can have a diverse range of meanings for distinct people and that such subjective meanings can potentially give rise to varied cognitions (Henderson 13). In the light of all these examples, it can be determined that the superior wharf hypothesis has shaped the conclusion made about the superior wharf hypothesis.

While this is the case, the use of deductive and inductive forms of reasoning does not shape the conclusions that people make. Deductive reasoning refers to the logical process where the conclusion is founded on the concordance associated with the multiple premises, which are generally assumed to be true (Evans 115). The following is a form of deductive reasoning. It is known that all dogs bark a lot. Therefore, since Bloodhound is also a dog, it also barks much. Such a deductive form of reasoning is sound (Fairchild 23). As such, the underlying premises are logical. While this is the case, the bloodhound is one of the dog breeds in the world that rarely bark. In this light, even with the logic of the deductive reasoning, one cannot come to a conclusion that the bloodhound barks a lot. Based on facts, such a conclusion is a fallacy and not convincing (Overton 56). The same can be said about inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning, according to Overton, relates to the form of reasoning where the premises attempt to offer the strongest evidence for the truth of certain conclusion (56). According to Overton, the truth associated with the inductive premises or an inductive reasoning is probable and this is especially due to the notion that it is based on the evidence provided (56). Take an instance of the following statement; if A is true, then B, C along with D must be true. An inductive reasoning from this statement would be; B, C, and D are observed to be true. Therefore, A is probably true, as well. Take an instance the following example, as well. An asteroid is likely to cause a large crater and at the same time, lead to the emergence of a severe winter, which has the ability to endanger the dinosaurs. It is observed that a large crater in the Mexican Gulf exists and dates near the time of the endangering and eventually, the extinction of the dinosaurs. Therefore, there is a high chance that the impact of asteroids could explain why the dinosaurs went into extinction. Just like the case of deductive reasoning, the premises or the reasoning of the above example is sound and makes immense logic. However, the conclusion is not necessarily the truth. There is a probability that other events or forces coincided with the extinction of the dinosaurs. Therefore, even with inductive reasoning, a person might have disbelief about the conclusions made. Therefore, just like the case of deductive reasoning, the inductive does not shape the conclusions made by people.

The same can be said about the concepts used in arts. A good example of an art concept is the feminist art movement. The feminist art movement, according to Jing, represents the efforts along with the accomplishments of the feminist group to produce art, which reflect the lives and experiences of women (560). The movement also refers to the efforts aimed at changing of the foundation of the production and the reception of the modern day art. The onset of the movement originates back in the 1960s. This was a period in which women artists fought for the equal rights as their male counterparts within not only within the field of arts but also in other areas of life. It is often reported that the system used in the traditional cultures is, in a large context, masculine in its nature. The systems that were used were mostly favoring men as opposed to women (Jing 560). They were constructed in such a manner that placed women in a subordinate role. Given the suppressive nature of such systems, women sought to respond by forming the feminist art movement. This particular movement sought to liberate women from the societal masculinity (Brandenburger and Vinokurova 286). It wanted to provide women with more rights and a greater voice in the society. The movement wanted to change the role of women, ensuring that they were equal to men. Louise Bourgeoisie was one of the forefront members of such art movements. He was an avant-garde singer, artist, and an activist. Her feminist works demanded equality and the recognition of the place of women in the society. As a result of the feminist art, women were acknowledged, and the societal system was restructured in such a manner that recognized or acknowledged the role of women (Brandenburger and Vinokurova 287). In this regard, it is worthwhile to inform that the feminist movements are what influenced the change in the role of women, which is visible to the present day. Today, women are not confined or limited to such places as the kitchen. Rather, they compete with men in the social institutions including the job market and workplaces. The feminist art movement laid the foundations for improved gender roles, an outcome that the modern day women enjoy. Therefore, the feminist movement concept has led to the conclusions about the role of women in the modern day.

However, the use of such concept as creative arts does not determine our conclusions. Take an instance of the contemporary forms of arts. Contemporary art, according to Young, refers to the form of art usually produced at the present period of time on modern materials using the recent tools and technologies (43). The modern day arts are more subjective in their attributes. To exist, it requires artists to smash paradigms. This is to say that the contemporary art ideally represents a derivative art that tends to operate within a specified terrain of the general. Also, the statement can be said to mean that the contemporary art usually borrows heavily from the historical art, but present itself as original. It clearly delineates itself from the traditional forms of arts, yet it lacks originality. Young seems to confirm this particular notion by revealing that the modern art smashes the reality in order to exist (45). These premises, just as the idea of feminist movement, are valid and offer a theoretical model related to contemporary arts. However, it does not shape the way we think. Unlike the older art forms, the new art is known to present in a manner that it elicits new ideas, perceptions and opinions about the world. In this regard, the theory surrounding the contemporary art has a range of flaws and as such, it cannot convince every person about its validity (Buckingham 101). Take an instance of a modern or a contemporary artist such as John Baldessari. In his After Dürer, an artwork produced in 2000, the artist, according to Young used an image from the 15th century of a tag beetle, which had been done by Albrecht Dürer (47). Also, he made the art his own, the artist is said to have juxtaposed the original art and appropriately acknowledged the originator of the art. The tendency of Baldessari does not reflect the arguments surrounding the concept of the contemporary arts (Brandenburger and Vinokurova 289). Therefore, it confirms the notion that some of the concepts used in arts do not shape the way people come to conclusions.

In conclusion, it can be said that the influence of concepts used in science and art on the way people make conclusions is mixed. This is to say that some concepts usually shape one’s conclusions while others do not. In art and science respectively, the women movement and the superior wharf hypothesis usually helps one to form his or her conclusions. In stark contrast, the concepts such as deductive reasoning and contemporary art do not influence the conclusion. Therefore, the relationship between concepts and conclusions in both art and science is a complex issue.

References
• Brandenburger, Adam, and Natalya Vinokurova. “Comment on “Toward a behavioral theory of strategy”.” Organization Science 23.1 (2012): 286-287.
• Buckingham, David. Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. London, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
• Buczynski, Sandy, et al. “Communicating Science Concepts through Art: 21st-Century Skills in Practice.” Science Scope 35.9 (2012): 29-35.
• Evans, Jonathan St BT. “Dual process theories of deductive reasoning: facts and fallacies.” The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (2012): 115-133.
• Fairchild, Kristen. “Dystopian Language and Thought: The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis Applied to Created Forms of English.” (2014).
• Henderson, Leighton. D. The fourth dimension and non-Euclidean geometry in modern art. London, UK: MIT Press, 2013.
• Jing, Huang. E. “The validity of Sapir–Whorf hypothesis—rethinking the relationship among language, thought and culture.” US China Foreign Lang 9.9 (2011): 560-568.
• Moloney, Caitriona. “feminist identity development and activism in revolutionary movements.” (2015): e31-e33.
• Overton, Willis F., ed. Reasoning, necessity, and logic: Developmental perspectives. New York, NY: Psychology Press, 2013.
• Young, Stacey. Changing the wor (l) d: Discourse, politics and the feminist movement. London, UK: Routledge, 2014.