*Transdisciplinary Art-Science Identities and the Artification of Learning DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101092*

possibly implied by their juxtaposition. She states clearly that human and butterflies are equally vulnerable. Her intertwining of the butterfly and the human eye is bound by the aesthetic materiality and affective rendering of the wings and eye towards an aesthetic likeness, or possible oneness (**Figure 3**). The observer can see in her diary entries, displayed as an assemblage created by the researcher (**Figure 4**), that she follows some of the fundamental non-algorithmic scientific observational and experimental methods, such as species identification and classification of insects called lepidoptera, butterflies and moths and drawing as illustration. The processes of artification displayed could be seen as a re-classification, or shifting of classification [48] as she experiments and adapts her drawings. She does demonstrate a strong perceptual bias towards established historical drawing techniques and formal design attributes in her representation of the butterfly and the eye, but it is accompanied by a process of visual editing and manipulation as she worked towards her goal 'to express the unique nature and vulnerability of each and everyone of us'.

**Figure 3.** *Aynsley artwork, butterfly eyes (2017), drawing.*

**Figure 4.** *Visual process learning An assemblage.*

Her artified behaviours find her commencing her inquiry with a real photographic representation of the butterfly (a) she has selected to draw (b). Page 2 of **Figure 4** sees her create a descriptive illustration of the species following the formal humanist art traditions and using the scientific process of labelling or categorising. However, there is an emergent new space, a liminal space where there is the possibility of a re-classification as seen in the image on the right (c) of **Figure 4** or a re-grounding of her subjectivity [57]. Aynsley speaks to the possible interpretive lenses of the viewers, some seeing an insect, others seeing a human. Aynsley, however, has created a new resemblance of difference, a possible de-centering of the traditional humanist-centred world. It speaks to a new generation of youth who are aware of the planet and species vulnerabilities and as such Aynsley's transdisciplinary study may speak to the 'disidentification from established patterns of thought (which) is crucial for an ethics and politics of inquiry that demands respect for the complexities of the real-life world we are living in' ([57], p. 16).
