<< I don't think it's the practice of a particular discipline that makes
you an artist, it's how you practice that discipline. Anyone can paint,
photograph, even do simple engineering tasks but only the artist creates
art. Additionally, mastering technical competence in a given area does
not automatically qualify one as an artist.
Agree. I didn't mean that if I work as a software engineer and am technically
competent in this area, then the software that I write is a piece of art
(although when I re-read my own message, it did sound that way). What I meant
was that when I do my software, I visually how the components flow and
interact with each other, how they interupt, how they have unity and
diversity, and at the end it is a piece of art if you can see it from the
software point of view. Of course, not everyone can see the artistic part of
it (because not everyone understands programming), but artistic design does
not have to be the traditional way. Afterall, we do have different dimensions
of arts: composition in visual dimension: 2d and 3d arts; composition in
audio dimension: music, and they have astonishing similarities (or even
duality), so why can't we have arts in other dimension like software design,
electron flows, etc. etc.? It is all just a matter of abstraction.
And have I gone too far?