Posted by
Steve Smith on
Mar 09, 2015; 9:27pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/metaphor-and-talking-across-skill-levels-tp7586111p7586116.html
Jochen -
Interesting use of a simile to explain the use of metaphor!
METAPHORS ARE LIKE GEMS ...
I wonder about the symmetries you suggest, however. In my
experience Metaphorical mappings tend to be more complete in one
direction than the other. LIFE IS A JOURNEY is not the same as A
JOURNEY IS LIFE ITSELF, and whether by convention or some other
more subtle reason, the former seems more apt than the latter.
In my conception of conceptual metaphors, both source (JOURNEY)
and target (LIFE) domains are infinite... that is to say that the
ideas one can use when describing LIFE or JOURNEY is ultimately
infinite. I've not found this described in the literature one way
or the other. Perhaps, despite both being infinite, we tend to
think of LIFE as being of a larger infinity than JOURNEY since in
fact, one's LIFE can contain many JOURNEYs.
-------------
Nick et. al. -
I agree with you that metaphor transcends simple figurative and
imaginative speech in literature. I'm a strong proponent of
Lakoff and Johnson's Thesis that all of language and understanding
is facilitated by the use of metaphor, eventually grounding out in
embodied image schemas (fundamental patterns understandable as
direct perceptual responses to environment).
I don't know what to say to you about "symmetry" except that "the
same on left and right" is a "good start". Pieces of pie are an
example of "rotational symmetry" so rather than "same" on "left
and right" it is "same" around a "center point of rotation".
Symmetries can lie in other variables than in simple geometry.
Perhaps you *do* have an expansive sense of symmetry but are
sometimes bamboozled by the way some (e.g. Guerin) might invoke it
in a much more subtle context than you are used to (e.g. "chaos
and symmetry breaking").
Science *does* pride itself in being "plain spoken" and I think
that is for a good reason. But that is not the same that saying
that there is no place for metaphor in scientific discourse. In
fact, I suspect you and I would agree that it is at least "very
useful" and I would claim (following Lakoff, Johnson, Nunez, et
al) that it is unavoidable. The "good reason" I suggest is a
corollary to Occam's Razor or better yet Einstein's admonition "as
simple as possible, but no simpler". Figurative speech
(including metaphor) tends to create complex images and
relationships between domains... in Scientific Discourse, one must
be very careful to not create unintended implications through the
use of metaphor.
I believe that usual use of metaphor in scientific discourse is
most effective for it's explanatory or persuasive power. It helps
us explain something we (the Scientist) already understands well
to a layperson with limited background to draw on for
understanding. We appeal to a metaphorical mapping with a
familiar source domain (e.g. DC electrical circuits/flow can be
understood as a hydraulic (pressure, velocity, flow,
cross-section, volume, etc.). As Bruce would point out (had he
not fled the room), there are aspects of this analogy which can be
shown to be incorrect and even misleading, however, for many
purposes, it is not only sufficient, but highly convenient way to
think of it.
My interest, however, is in it's core role in all discourse but
more to the point, in Scientific Inquiry. Lakoff and Nunez'
claims regarding the fundamental embodiment of mathematics suggest
this quite strongly. To the extent that mathematics is the
language of Science and that Mathematical concepts are built on
top of direct embodied experiences using the mechanisms of
metaphor, I think it's a done deal, albeit a bit trite by some
measures. And even more to the point, I'm interested in *how* to
use metaphor in a formal and leveraged manner to increase
understanding of otherwise intractable scientific questions.
That is to say, how to gain intuition about problems, how to help
with hypothesis generation, how to help with synthesis of data and
understanding from previously distinct fields of study.
just my $.02,
- Steve
Historically,
I have had terrible trouble with the way some folks employ
“symmetry” on this list. Steve G. and I used to get into
tangles about this. I get that crystals have “symmetry”,
but beyond that, I am struggling to understand what you
mean. Perhaps you might explicate for those of us who have
a hard time not thinking of symmetry as just “being the same
on the right as on the left, etc.”
I
am further made very nervous with any implication that
literature “owns” metaphor whereas scientists are given to
plain speech. I think this way of think VASTLY under states
the role of metaphor in science. Think Natural Selection,
for instance. Also, I have often wondered if a metaphor
with magnetism lay behind Newton’s thinking on gravity.
Lodestones were of great interest to scientists in Court at
the time because of their usefulness in navigation, but also
as a curiousity. Lakoff and Nunen (?) describe the central
role of metaphors in the development of mathematics.
Peirce’s emphasis on “sign” places something very like
metaphor at the center of all scientific thought.
Nick
From:
Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 1:23 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group; Friam; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] metaphor and talking across
skill levels
Speaking of metaphors: recently I thought
that metaphors and poems are a bit like the gems of
language. As you know gems are rare and valuable and have
often a highly symmetrical structure. The rhymes in poems
mirror the symmetries of words, while metaphors and
analogies mirror the (timeless) symmetries of ideas.
Take for example the metaphor LIFE IS A
JOURNEY. I think this is one of the metaphors in "Metaphors
We Live By" from George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. It
indicates certain similarities and symmetries in the ideas
behind the concepts for "life" and "journey". There is a
beginning and an end connected by long winding path, etc. So
basically metaphors are all about symmetries which let you
describe one idea in terms of another.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com