SCIENCE IN ART—Science, Art & Perception: Art by Rocío Romero Grau.
The rigid separation of art and science is a symptom of a dying intellectual culture that fears creativity as much as it fears truth.
For centuries, our society has been conditioned to believe that art and science occupy opposite ends of the intellectual spectrum—one driven by emotion and expression, and the other by logic and reason. This binary way of thinking, born from outdated academic structures and reinforced by institutional inertia, has created a false polarity that limits both disciplines. The truth is that the most significant scientific breakthroughs have often stemmed from imagination, and the most impactful art pieces are found upon inquiry and experimentation. Separating art from science is not only a misconception but also intellectually lazy.
The division between art and science is a relatively modern misconception. In the Renaissance, major public figures like Leonardo da Vinci embodied artistic and scientific practices, blending anatomical studies with breathtaking representative drawings of his findings.
It wasn't until the enlightenment and the rise of the industrial-era education systems that a sharp line was drawn between the two domains. Schools and universities began to specialize, categorizing knowledge into rigid disciplines and promoting the idea that creativity belonged to the arts while objectivity belonged to science. This compartmentalization was efficient for producing specialized workers but disastrous for cultivating well-formed thinkers.
In today’s world, art cannot afford to remain isolated in white-walled galleries, disconnected from the issues that will eventually shape our future. When stripped of its dialogue with science, art risks becoming decorative, a luxury rather than a language of inquiry. True art has always been a tool to explore the unknown, to question, and to reveal. It is not the opposite of logic but a different path to understanding. The separation has diminished both: science loses its essence, and art loses its relevance. We need artists who dare to engage with data, with technology, and with the complex systems that define our lives—not to illustrate science, but to challenge it, reinterpret it, and humanize it.
This is precisely the territory explored by Rocío Grau, a contemporary artist whose installation work blurs the boundaries between art, neuroscience, and human perception. Her pieces don’t simply ask to be seen; they demand to be felt, triggered, and responded to. Through immersive environments that engage the senses and manipulate stimuli, Rocío Grau investigates the fragile mechanics of the human cognitive process. She doesn’t just present the viewer with a concept; she activates it in their body. Her work challenges the idea that art should be passive or purely aesthetic, becoming a living experiment where each audience member becomes both subject and observer.
Rocío Grau’s work makes clear that the supposed boundary between art and science is not only artificial but also actively harmful to our cultural and intellectual evolution. Her installations don’t offer answers; they generate questions, sensations, and cognitive dissonance. They remind us that art, like science, is a form of research. Perhaps the most urgent research we can do now is into our perceptions, our assumptions, and our limits. In the following interview, we will get to know Rocío Grau’s creative process, the scientific frameworks that shape her work, and why challenging disciplinary borders is not just a choice but a necessity.