Huh? The number of people does not mean much. My point is that people should be educated in more areas, so that the scientist understands part of what the artist's work, and the artist understands part of the scientist's work.

I mean it the way that I realized I didn't really understand paintings until I started thinking, especially artistically when so required (because art is one of my main hobbies). This applies much more to realistic paintings than conceptual works, admittedly. I also recognize that this phrase is vague, and less mathematical than something like decision theory. Part of it is recognizing that anyone can be a (realistic) artist, if they notice the world around them. Assuming, though, that art takes simple observational skills to the next level (e.g. trying to perfect reality), should people try to understand the reality first, or come to the painting, trying to understand what the artist was trying to say, without having thought about reality first?

Indeed it is. I meant it as more of "ways and process of thinking."