THE EXPLANATION

What is it?

WHAT ARTINSIEME IS?

Artinsieme is not only –art-, as it would seem by its name, and as the word -art- commonly means in the current etymological meaning, that the language provides for. On the contrary, Artinsieme is a ‘new’ way of being of the –art- itself.

In ancient times every –field of knowledge- was called –art-, so there were the arts of trivium and the arts of quadrivium. We don’t understand why this beautiful outlook of the -knowledge-, that is sublimed by the use of the word –art-, added to the specific descriptive adjective of the -field- (astronomical art, mathematical art, naval art, musical art, pictorial art, etc.), got lost, and why today we use a ‘cold’ terminology such as –discipline- or , even ‘colder’, -subject- .

Astronomy, Literature, Music, Painting, Mathematics, Engineering, Architecture, Economics, Cinema, Theatre, Psychology, Sociology, etc., require studies, that cannot leave aside the creativity, and/or the interpretation, and/or the expressiveness. Besides, studying is always creative, and/or interpretative, and/or expressive.

By means of the creativity, the expressiveness, and the interpretation, a training subject (or an already trained subject, even if the training should be conceived as permanent) evinces his/her own intelligence, and his/her own sensibility, as well as his/her own behaviour. Every –field- (none excluded) needs creative, expressive and interpretative abilities, in order to be studied, investigated and improved.

The researcher and the scientist are as –artists- as a musician or a painter. In their research they pursue a common aim, that is the research, and/or the investigation, by means of the study. A scientist, or, in any case, a researcher, or a practitioner of any –field-, goes in search of the truth, or in search of the improvement of what is being, exactly as an –artist- does. All of them are looking for an explanation of certain phenomena of nature, of extra-nature, of morality, of psyche, of society, of physics, and so on.

That’s why, according to Artinsieme, every –field of knowledge— is –art-. As a consequence, the –knowledge- is –art-. It couldn’t be otherwise. Even in ancient times, a break in two stumps (the arts of trivium and the arts of quadrivium) was a mistake. However, at least the word –art- was kept.

Today we are ridiculous.

The –knowledge- is one!!!

The denominations of the –fields of knowledge- are very vague.

All the denominations, but the right ones, are used.

Discipline, subject, education: a complete mess.

We don’t understand why, in the primary and in the secondary school of first grade, there is a division of the –knowledge- in –Disciplines- (Mathematics, Italian, etc) and –Educations- (Motor or Physical Education, Artistic Education or Education to the Images, Education to the Music, etc), as if Education to the Mathematics or Education to the Italian do not exist, or as if we cannot pursue an education by means of them.

What’s the sense of it?

Moreover, what does ‘Education to the Images’ mean? By chance, are children educated to take care of their own look? No, they aren’t! They draw, they paint, they cut, etc.

There is a real Babel in the use of terminology.

Artinsieme proposes at school the adoption of these terminologies, that are correct from an etymological point of view: the Linguistic Art (is art required, or not, if we want to read and write good?), the Mathematical Art (is art required, or not, if we want to solve a problem?), the Musical Art, the Technical Art, the Economic Art, the Manipulative Expressive Art (for example, instead of Education to the Images), etc.

Strongly and with firm believe, Artinsieme aims at the unity of the – knowledge-, and so, at the unity of the –arts-, starting from scientific positions. We think that this step is necessary for an evolution of the human species towards the good. As a matter of fact, we believe that the problems should be faced and examined from several disciplinary prospects (that is, according to Artinsieme, artistic prospects). We also believe that the solution of a problem is more correct (and easier), if the several –fields of knowledge- would have the possibility to interact, so that they could supply a shared solution of the problem. An economic problem cannot be faced only on an economic level. The suggested solution won’t ever be effective, and it won’t ever be the right solution. An economic problem must be examined from different prospects, that had to include, for example, also sociological, psychological, legal valuations, etc. For this reason, it would be opportune that, in order to face an economic problem on a legal level, a team of practitioners, coming from  several –fields- , not only from the economic –field-, would work at it.

We can tell the same for an environmental problem, or for any other –field- problems.

It goes without saying!

We suggest an Artinsieme team, because we firmly believe that we could find creative, functional and effective solutions.

The division into sectors of the –culture-, and the consequent professional specializations, are all modern elements of “proposing the knowledge”, that behaved as if they inserted the thought in conceptual categories. Thus, the thought is made little adaptable to multi-disciplinary connections, that, as we know it for some time, better favour the “problem solving”, namely, the ability of a free thinking individual to face and solve the problems, that life constantly sets before him/her.

By means of the specialization, the mind extended of a single person, developing, even if by means of his/her intelligence, only microscopic sectors of the so much wider –knowledge-, so that it generated an important preparation in an infinitesimal –field- of the –culture- , and it generated a complete real ignorance in anything else.

It follows that anything else is judged and valued by means of prejudices and preconceptions, and not by using an actual knowledge of how things really are from a scientific point of view.

To speak scientifically, we often activate only neurons that belong to the same area, while the others stay a little in abeyance.

An hyper-specialized man/woman has general ideas concerning the other -fields of knowledge- that he/she thinks a little or not at all connected to his/her competent cultural –field-  (yet, we all know that everything is connected!). But such ideas are wrong most of the times, because they are not supported by a scientific knowledge, that is outside his/her own sector of professional competence. Unfortunately, we don’t have the time to investigate such ideas, because this would mean to achieve specializations in other –fields-!

The issue is that the title “Doctor in ...”, that is achieved at the University, is meant by the society as a title of warrant of the intelligence or the training of the owner. But we don’t think that, considering the scientific theories of the Multiple Brains by Gardner  and the Emotional Brain by Goleman, the degree in a – field of knowledge - proposes an investigated understanding of that very  – field -, but, at the same time, it proposes an ignorance (from the  Latin ignorare, that means “not to know”, without an offensive meaning) of anything else.

It’s up to the good will of a practitioner to investigate his/her knowledge, by filling the gap of his/her ignorance in all the other –fields-, in addition to his/her own -field-. The practitioner, who acts like this, is able to be certainly more productive and effective in his/her work, for himself/herself and for the others.

We need to remember that the science claims that the human being has developed only a very little part (nearly an infinitesimal part) of his/her potential intelligence.

The consequence is that a person has not the solution of the general problems of life, which afflicts the human species, from the origin of the times since now, namely the happiness and the search for it.

A single individual is not able to do it, but maybe many individuals all together, coming from different –fields of knowledge- are able to do it. If only it would be possible to get together many forms of intelligence, that could join between them, and that, each of them, could humbly go and overcome the owned prejudices and the preconceptions towards the –fields of knowledge- not belonging to his/her single competence!

Artinsieme is trying exactly to do this, by means of the contribution of different thoughts, that work together with synergy on the formulation of a complex thought, as it is meant by the French philosopher and sociologist Edgar Morin, who has been recently asked to personally intervene by the Italian Ministry of Instruction, University and Research.

The teaching of the Master Socrates (“I know not to know”) has getting lost in the course of history, and today, in spite of us, everybody believes to know everything.

But, unfortunately, human presumption is an evil, that the man could never got rid of, as history teaches us. By means of the arbitrary personal elevation of the very intelligence of the individual over the intelligence of the others, this presumption has also produced and still continuously produces injustices, as, who presumes and has the power, acts influencing the freedom of the others. And who presumes is not always right.

History is filled with many examples of men, who caused, by means of their presuming,  not only serious injustices, but even disasters. Those were first of all emotional disasters of the general awareness of people, who have not the power, in spite of them, even if nowadays people are beguiled to get the power by means of the concept of democracy, which is still, with our never-ending sadness, only a concept.

The presumption is the highest form of foolishness, as it prevents from opening to the “problem solving” at the starting of a constructive dialogue, that would aim at the solution of a problem.

We can notice a deep historical modern contradiction between what the school, as an institution legally deputed to the training of the citizens of tomorrow, on the basis of constitutional rules, and, among them, the Article 33 of the Constitution is the foundation of it, suggests as fundamental and necessary, in order to training a ”well-bred and good thinking” subject, and the society that, in spite of us, pursues other aims.

The school wants the unity of the knowledge, the society divides the knowledge.

The school wants inter-culture, the society is not able to put it into practice.

The school wants justice, the society is not able to warrant it.

The school should reward the merits, the society sometimes rewards the merits.

The school wants equal rights, the society suggests differences.

The school thinks of the future, the society tries to find a remedy for the damages made in the past.

And what about the present?

The present is a shapeless synthesis between “what should be and it is not” and “what had been and it is no more”

This is a big problem, and we need to solve it soon, if we don’ t want the situation to slip out of our hands.

By means of Artinsieme, we want to suggest a new way of making –culture-, of making -art-, that could complete (you need to be careful: ‘complete’ and not ‘modify’) the concept itself of –art-, by completing it as the class of thought, of which we are accustomed to thinking.

Artinsieme wants to complete this concept by moving to a scientific direction, that could seem deceptive and probably ideal, but however it makes the mathematical/philosophical logic an adhesive aspect. But who can coherently think that it couldn’t be at least formative? Is it not right just because it draws inspiration from well-known and acknowledged pedagogical theories?

The –art- is considered as a more complete class of thinking than we are usually accustomed to imaging today.

The –art- that wants to unite, not to divide.

The–art- that wants to be freely what it is.

The –art- that wants to propose humbly a present solution to the present man.

The –art- that wants to explain.

Artinsieme was founded by an artist, who is also a state regular teacher of the primary school indefinitely. It proposes itself as an apolitical and non-party school, that is purified from some of its ancestral expressive excesses, and that is enriched by new elements fallen into the reality of the same –art-, with the primary purpose to turn out as a beautiful, formative and intelligent example/model to follow for the future time.

We hope that Artinsieme will be carefully considered as it really deserves, and that it will be helped to grow in the direction, that would respect the purity of the thought it represents.

We hope that Artinsieme will be able to represent soon a model, of which Italy must be proud in the eyes of the world, and that can be exported all over the world as an academic model.

The main etymologic knotty problem to solve, the real struggle of Artinsieme, is that the –art- is educational in its own essence, and that anything not educational is not –real art- but –artism-.

But, if we think so, how much actual “art” do we have to throw into the toilet?

Educating is from the Latin “educere”, that means “to lead out”. In the Italian dictionary the meaning of educating is expressed like this, among many others: “To help, by means of suitable discipline, to put into effect, to develop the good inclinations of the heart and the powers of the mind, and to fight against the not good inclinations; to lead the man out of the original defects of the rough nature, by means of instilling frames of morality and good manners”.

Is this or not the task of the –art-?