生物藝術，作為當代藝術中的新興領域，吸引了不少評論家、史學家和生物藝術本身的實踐者質疑它在藝術層面上的形式、定義與美學意涵。因生物藝術作品常透過操縱生命（如基因調控技術）或使用生物媒材（如動物組織）為表現材料與手法，因此多數的學者經常在辯論它隱含的道德議題。但除此之外，生物藝術亦可作為一聯結藝術與科學兩種文化的橋樑，它的實踐需對兩個不同領域的知識與方法論有相當程度的涉入。

本研究試圖以質性調查的方式去探討生物藝術的跨領域性。同時，此實踐通常是透過一個合作的模式與機制，所以存在相關的平台來促進其跨領域實踐的可能，研究也企圖理解跨領域平台與生物藝術實踐的關係，並以2012年成立於台灣的平台「台灣生物藝術社群」為例。

本文以個案分析及深度訪談法去探究研究現象背後的本理。研究從台灣生物藝術社群的經驗推論了跨領域性要素之間的關聯性，以及跨領域平台在這當中作為一個網絡的角色意義。

Bioart, as an emerging practice in contemporary art context, has drawn a substantial amount of attention from art critics, historians, and its very own practitioners to question its form, definition, and aesthetics as an art practice. Due to some bioart works manipulating living systems by using genetic engineering or employing biomaterials such as animal tissues as their expressive media, scholars have since widely discussed on its ethical issues. In addition, bioart is a practice that bridges the two cultures, art and science, and engages with knowledge and methodology of both disciplines. It is essential to explore its interdisciplinarity as a means to possibly fill the gap between the art and science.

This research aims to explore the interdisciplinarity of bioart practice through a qualitative investigation. As the interdisciplinary practice is often a collaborative process, platforms that facilitate the process exist around the world. This research also attempts to understand the relationship between the interdisciplinary platforms and the practice by taking a case study approach towards a Taiwanese bioart community, TW BioArt.

Case study and in-depth interview were conducted to generate insights to the understanding of the phenomenon. Investigation draws conclusions about the relationship of each elements of interdisciplinarity, as well as the role of the interdisciplinary platform as a network to the interdisciplinary practice from the perspective of TW BioArt.

References

Books / Articles

Adrian, M., & Andrew, M. (2008). The Two Cultures Become Multiple? Sciences, Humanities and Everyday Experimentation. Australian Feminist Studies, 23(55), 87-100. doi:10.1080/08164640701816256
Aldrich, J. H. (2014). Interdisciplinarity: Its Role in a Discipline-based Academy. NY: Oxford University Press.
Andrews, L. B. (2007). Art as a Public Policy Medium. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 125-149). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Anker S., & Nelkin, D. (2004). The Molecular Gaze: Art in the Genetic Age. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Bohm, D., & Peat, F. D. (1987). Science, Order, and Creativity. NY: Bantam Books.
Brockman, J. (1995). The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution. NY: Touchstone.
Campbell, D. T. (2005). Ethnocentrism of Disciplines and the Fish-scale Model of Omniscience. In S. J. Derry, C. D. Schunn, & M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Interdisciplinary Collaboration: An Emerging Cognitive Science (pp. 3-22). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chiu, CY., Kwan, L. YY., & Liou, S. (2013). Culturally Motivated Challenges to Innovations in Integrative Research: Theory and Solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review, 7(1), 149-172.
Damm, U., Hopfengärtner, B., Niopek, D., & Bayer, P. (2013). Are artists and engineers inventing the culture of tomorrow? Futures, 48, 55-64. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2013.02.007
davidkremers. (2007). Repro Duction. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 295-300). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Davis, J. (2007). Cases for Genetic Art. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 249-266). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Eubanks, P. (2012, March). Interdisciplinary Study: Research as Part of Art Making. Art Education.
Gessert, G. (2006). Looking into Life: A Review of Recent Literature on Biotech Art. Art Papers, 30(3), 16-18.
Gessert, G. (2010). Green Light: Toward an Art of Evolution. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Gibbs, W. W. (2001, April). Art as a Form of Life. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/art-as-a-form-of-life/
Halpern, K. H. (2011). Across the great divide: Boundaries and boundary objects in art and science. Public Understanding of Science, 21(8), 922-937. doi:10.1177/0963662510394040
Harris K. R., & Alexander, P. A. (1998). Integrated, Constructivist Education: Challenge and Reality. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2), 115-127.
Hauser, J., Capucci, P. L., & Torriano, F. (2007). Art Biotech. Bologna: CLUEB.
Howkins, J. (2007). The Creative Economy: How People Make Money from Ideas (2nd ed.). London: Penguin Books.
Kac, E. (2007a). Art that Looks You in the Eye: Hybrids, Clones, Mutants, Synthetics, and Transgenics. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 1-27). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kac, E. (2007b). Life Transformation- Art Mutation. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 163-184). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kallergi, A. (2008). Bioart on Display: challenges and opportunities of exhibiting bioart. Retrieved from http://www.kallergia.com/bioart/docs/kallergi_bioartOnDisplay.pdf
Lestel, D. (2007). Liberating Life from Itself: Bioethics and Aesthetics of Animality. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 151-160). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Lindauer, M. S. (1998). Interdisciplinarity, the Psychology of Art, and Creativity: An Introduction. Creativity Research Journal, 11(1), 1-10.
Mace, M., & Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the Creative Process: A Grounded Theory Analysis of Creativity in the Domain of Art Making. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), 179-192.
Malina, R. F. (2012). Third Culture? From the arts to the sciences and back again. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research, 10(2+3), 179-183. doi:10.1386/tear.10.2-3.179_1
Miller, J., & Glassner, B. (2011). The “Inside” and the “Outside”: Finding Realities in Interviews. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Issues of Theory, Method and Practice (3rd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
Mitchell, R. (2010). Bioart and the Vitality of Media. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (2005). What Do Pictures Want? The Lives and Loves of Images. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Myers, W. (2012). Bio Design: Nature, Science, Creativity. London: Thames & Hudson.
Nelkin, D. (2007). Blood and Bioethics in the Biotechnology Age. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 115-124). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Olynyk, P. (2012). Minding the Gap: Risk Capital and the Myth of Two Cultures [Editorial]. Leonardo, 45(1), 2.
Parisi, L. (2009). What Can Biotechnology Do? Process-events vs the Bio-logic of life. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(4), 155-163. doi:10.1177/0263276409104973
Pearce, C., Diamond, S., & Beam, M. (2003). BRIDGES I: Interdisciplinary Collaboration as Practice. Leonardo, 36(2), 123-128.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: SAGE Publications.
Snow, C. P. (1963). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steinheider, B., & Legrady, G. (2004). Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Digital Media Art: A Psychological Perspective on the Production Process. Leonardo, 37(4), 315-321.
Stember, M. (1991). Advancing the social sciences through the interdisciplinary enterprise. The Social Science Journal, 28(1), 1-14. doi:10.1016/0362-3319(91)90040-B
Stemler, S. (2001). An Overview of Content Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=17
Stracey, F. (2009). Bio-art: the ethics behind the aesthetics. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 10(7), 496-500. doi:10.1038/nrm2699
Strauss, A., & Corbin J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Thacker, E. (2005). The Global Genome: Biotechnology, Politics, and Culture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Tress, B., Tress, G., & Fry, G. (2006). Defining concepts and the process of knowledge production in integrative research. In B. Tress, G. Tress, G. Fry, & P. Opdam (Ed.), From landscape research to landscape planning: Aspects of integration, education and application (pp. 13-26). NY: Springer.
Vita-More, N. (2007). Brave BioArt 2: shedding the bio, amassing the nano, and cultivating posthuman life. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research, 5(3), 171-186. doi:10.1386/tear.5.3.171/1
Willet, J. (2006). Bodies in Biotechnology: Embodied Models for Understanding Biotechnology in Contemporary Art. Leonardo Electronic Almanac, 14(7+8), 1-11. Retrieved from http://leoalmanac.org/journal/vol_14/lea_v14_n07-08/jwllet.asp
Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundations of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. NY: Vintage Books.
Wilson, S. (2010). Art + Science Now: How scientific research and technological innovation are becoming key to 21st-century aesthetics. London: Thames & Hudson.
Wolfe, C. (2007). Bioethics and the Posthumanist Imperative. In E. Kac (Ed.), Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond (pp. 95-114). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Yang, A. S. (2011). Interdisciplinarity as Critical Inquiry: Visualizing the Art/Bioscience Interface. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36(1), 42-54. doi:10.1179/030801811X12941390545681
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.

中文文獻

陳湘汶 (2015)。科學與藝術的交會：初訪台灣生物藝術社群TW BioArt。藝外Artitude，64期，頁112-113。

顧廣毅 (2015)。陰莖口交改造計畫 – 酷兒快感的「藝術與科學」實踐。碩士論文。實踐大學。

Websites

ALEXANDRA DAISY GINSBERG. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.daisyginsberg.com/
ALEXIS ROCKMAN: The Official Site (2013). Retrieved Dec 5, 2014, from http://www.alexisrockman.net/
ARS ELECTRONICA (2014). Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.aec.at/news/en/
Arts@CERN. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://arts.web.cern.ch/
Bio Art & Design Award. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.badaward.nl/
Biofaction (2014). Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.biofaction.com/
BIO-FICTION Taiwan (2015). Retrieved June 20, 2015, http://biofiction.bioart.tw/
Biofutures: owning body parts and information. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.biofuturesdvd.com/project/index1.html
BIORHYTHM (2014). Retrieved Dec 11, 2014, from http://activity.ntsec.gov.tw/biorhythm/index.html?a=2921
CASP LAB (2013). Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://casp-lab.tumblr.com/
GENSPACE. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://genspace.org/
iGEM: Synthetic Biology based on standard parts. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://igem.org/Main_Page
Jensenius, A. R. (2012, March 12). Disciplinarities: intra, cross, multi, inter, trans [Web log]. Retrieved Dec 15, 2014, from http://www.arj.no/2012/03/12/disciplinarities-2/
KAC Web. Retrieved Dec 5, 2014, from http://ekac.org/
KUANG-YI KU. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from http://www.kukuangyi.com/
New Museum of Contemporary Art (2014). Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.newmuseum.org/
PEI-YING LIN (2015). Retrieved June 20, 2015, from http://peiyinglin.net/index.html
PSX Consultancy. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from http://psx-consultancy.com/
Science Gallery. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from https://dublin.sciencegallery.com/
SVA NYC. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.sva.edu/
SymbioticA Home. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/
TW BioArt (2015). Retrieved May 15, 2015, from http://bioart.tw/
TW BioArt Facebook Group. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from https://www.facebook.com/groups/twbioart/
UCLA ART/SCI CENTER + LAB. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://artsci.ucla.edu/
waag society. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from https://www.waag.org/en
Wellcome Trust. Retrieved Dec 6, 2014, from http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/