"As far as I understand, this basic theme is what has run as an undercurrent in the previous series of essays and is hinted at in this essay. Who cares how you define science?"
That is absolutely correct. The underlying theme is the same, but in the new series I address subjects that do not fit neatly in categories such as the ones I use for the Photography & Aesthetics series, namely composition, exposure, lenses, seeing, film choice, keepers, portfolios, personal style, being an artist and the upcoming being an artist in business which is currently 2/3rds done. In this new series I address subjects that are more problematic, subjects that are rarely, if ever addressed.
In regards to the definition of science, my take was that everyone agrees on the dictionary definition of science. However, somehow the discussion took a different turn. In my regard, that changes nothing. As you say, there are two aspects to photography, and a world class photograph demonstrates mastery of both.
Now most people find themselves, at first, stronger in one of those two aspects and that is the basis for my essay. The goal is to excel at both, and to do that we have to bypass our natural tendency to lean towards the side we are naturally better at. To do this we have to make changes, and to make changes requires a willingness to learn. Change is good, but change is also difficult. My next essay focuses on the concept of change, so we will be able to clarify what changes we are talking about.
Do keep in mind that this is the first essay in this series.
Finally, I do believe you know what you are talking about :- )