Dürer's Scientific Side

TLDR: The question remains what Durer meant by knowledge as mentioned in this paper, and the point of this question is driven home by noting that Richter's remark is made in the context of surprise at how near Leonardo's "conception of what true science should be came to modern standards".

Abstract: By “science” I mean knowledge in its broadest sense. Durer's scientific side thus becomes, in terms of his art, the practice of art insofar as it is the pursuit of knowledge. Richter observes that in the Renaissance “no clear distinction was drawn between art, science, and philosophy,”1 so that it seems the practice of the one would necessarily be the practice of the others. However, the question remains what Durer meant by knowledge. The point of this question is driven home by noting that Richter's remark is made in the context of surprise at how near Leonardo's “conception of what true science should be came to modern standards.”2 Can the same be said for Durer?