I read the work of historian-scientific Ernst Peter Fischer entitled " Genetics as the Arts or: Explanation

for the life that creates itself with genes."

I understand the work to be a thought experiment that explains the developmental processes in

nature and the process of painting, which understands nature itself to be a creative artist. For the

development of organisms E. P. Fischer suggests human creativity as a metaphor which expresses itself

perhaps during the painting of a picture. Organic ( structural ) developing and the process of painting

are comparable processes. This concept inspires me and this is the first and foremost reflection in my

works. Each painted picture undergoes a development. The development I understand as course of

events, the not at cycle-constant course and a process with all change ( changeable ) - this to consist of origin, interaction and change.

Modern genetics understands, rational-anatically, the gene to be the causative factor, however it is

nevertheless also a formative factor. " The aesthetic components of genes help clarify the term "form"

with which one expresses that the genes form nature and vice versa nature forms the genes." Genes

create and are created and this aesthetic unity of creation shows something of the process of creation.

" Thanks to genes, maybe we ( and other forms of life ) emerge in the same manner as the works of a

painter emerge. During painting the process of creation begins with en idea ( mental image ) in the

head of the artist. The continuation of the process then depends on the results that are visible on the

canvas during the creation of the painting. As far as the embryonic development is concerned, the

process commences with the given odds in the core of the cell and the further continuation depends on

the creations which emerge in due course and are registered by the enviroment which lead back to the

creating of and created life. Whoever describes the creator of a painting, thereby seperating the

creator from the creation ( maker from the made ) misses the point and this is exactly what applies to

biological development. In their description one should not attempt to separate the creator from the

created because the genes and their creations are constantly interacting. Genes do not reel off a pro-

gramme, on the contrary genes play their part creatively. The entirety of the genes, that wich we call

"genome" is equipped with creativity."

It is suggested that one imagines the genes could paint and produce colours. " And they do this when

living organisms succeed in making themselves the creating and created beings. In order to link this 

artistic performance to scientific knowledge we must remind ourselves that genes allow a cell to pro-

duce proteins whereby we should take note that the principle of creative duality shows again that

ultimately the genes make the proteins, the genes make molecularbiology. Proteins transport oxygen,

they receive light, they move muscles, they digest ( decompose ) nourishment and much more. A 

special class of protein has the characteristic of coming into direct contact with the genes themselves.

These are called "master proteins", simply because the production of other proteins are dependent on

them." 

Developmental biologists have established: " That on the one hand all organisms have at their dis-

posal a store of master proteins ( and corresponding genes ) that appear during the early stages of

development and through their pattern of activity determine what will become of these particular cells.

With this store of master proteins one can build patterns which one could call a fabric and whose form 

in the course of growth is gradually refined and perfected - exactly like the painting of a picture." The

pattern is subject to constant change, just as in the painting process a form develops with every 

stroke of the brush.

" The british biologist Enrico Coen suggested that one imagine the master proteins to be the hidden

( inner ) colour with which the painting begins to live. The decisive factor which enables the comparison

between the painting and the growth lies in the interaction. The colours come from the genes and influ-

ence them. Accordingly the colours on the canvas originate from the painter to whom it reacts, and in 

both cases the actors do not act freely but in accordance with historically determined factors. The 

painter is influenced and formed by time and his culture and the genes carry their evolutionary history

within themselves."

Is it not wonderful and fascinating, at the same time, how in nature the tiniest genes and cells are 

constantly changing from one condition to the next, thereby creating ultimately plant or being? Nature 

is equipped with creativity. The basis above all are the forms which the genes create because we like

them. We speak about the beauty of nature, of the artwork of live.

" Thereby it is not about mere knowledge, but about another way of dealing with our knowledge and

ignorance." ( Bernhard von Mutius ) 

1)  Ernst Peter Fischer - Physiker, Biologe und Wissenschaftshistoriker,

      " Genetik als Geisteswissenschaft oder: Erklärungen für das Leben, das sich mit 

        den Genen selber schafft."

2)  Bernhard von Mutius - Sozialwissenschaftler und Philosoph,

     " Die andere Intelligenz - Wie wir morgen denken werden ",

      Klett - Cotta, Stuttgart 2004                

back