I’ve been exploring this question for a long time. Actually it is a set of questions because it concerns goals, practices, behaviors, methodologies, etc. But here are a few ideas.
Both science and art are systematic. Both ask questions and are exploratory in nature, and demand rigor.
Both science and art build. The scientist or artist builds a body of work, a set of inquiries, and a practice.
Both science and art are referential. Practitioners in both disciplines use the past to bring the present into being.
Both science and art are experimental. There is always a give-and-take, always a risk for failure and the hope of success
In my opinion both disciplines also are prone to a severe failing. They both can become canalized, as a set of individuals come to conceptualize only within a given range of ideas. Both disciplines tend to be prescriptive in this way and can discourage creative thinking outside the box.
Just a few short thoughts jotted down in the morning.