How the author thinks artists 2 writers in what is science

I'm not exactly sure what your question here is. Generally speaking, Orwell argues that it is artists and writers that bear the brunt of persecution when thought and free speech is under attack. Science has its uses of course but it is writers and artists that keep civilization "civilized".

But does all this mean that the general public should not be more scientifically educated? On the contrary! All it means is that scientific education for the masses will do little good, and probably a lot of harm, if it simply boils down to more physics, more chemistry, more biology, etc., to the detriment of literature and history. Its probable effect on the average human being would be to narrow the range of his thoughts and make him more than ever contemptuous of such knowledge as he did not possess: and his political reactions would probably be somewhat less intelligent than those of an illiterate peasant who retained a few historical memories and a fairly sound aesthetic sense.