Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!rex!uflorida!pine.circa.ufl.edu!bougie From: bougie@pine.circa.ufl.edu (BRO) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Metaphors, Information and War Summary: Metaphors DO *affect* reasoning Keywords: metaphor, analogy Message-ID: <26303@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> Date: 14 Jan 91 15:22:25 GMT References: <801@keele.keele.ac.uk> <802@keele.keele.ac.uk> Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU Reply-To: bougie@pine.circa.ufl.edu Followup-To: comp.ai, sci.lang, sci.psychology Organization: University of Florida - pine.circa.ufl.edu Lines: 49 News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4 In article (sender only) Mark Volovic writes: > I submit that the usage of metaphors is essential for any PUBLIC >speech about the possibly upcoming war. > However, I doubt very much that language itself will influence the >advancement of the events. The language may be a reflection of the advancement, >but not its wheels. Lakoff's point is that we DO reason about things & events by making use of the inferences that arise with the metaphors we choose. Reddy was perhaps the first to make this clear in his paper called "The Conduit Metaphor: a case of frame conflict in our language about language" Reddy, M.J. (1979) in A.Ortony _Metaphor & Thought_ (pp284-324) CUP. where he demonstrates that we have a great deal of difficulty detaching ourselves from a metaphor of communication in which the transmitted BITS are metaphorically mapped onto the MEANING. (see the "Bandwidth of the Brain" subject chain!). Lakoff is pointing out that while metaphor is a very useful means of simplifying reasoning (analogy) it is also capable of misleading us into oversimplifications. I'm not going to claim that Bush, Baker, Azziz & co. do not and cannot see the schematicity of their metaphors (nor that they do and can!) but public opinion to a large extent seems to be content with the "truth" that war=a game, Saddam=Irag (state=person), or Sadam=dragon & US=white knight & Kuwait=damsel in distress. It just *ain't that simple*!! CNN reported that while 51% of Americans (when asked point-blank) are in favor of going to war with Iraq, that figure drops to something like 30% when they're asked if getting Iraq out of Kuwait is worth 1000 American lives. That %age drops to around 15% if you postulate 20,000 dead. Deaths just don't seem to be part of the war=game metaphor and it's too easy to forget! The game metaphor also makes it too easy to forget about the "post- game" situation. It is NOT all over once the fat lady sings! In sum, I don't think it is a good idea to underestimate the role of metaphor in reasoning. It can play a causal role. Lakoff's analysis cannot be brushed off so easily. (Lakoff's paper is available on a listserver who's address I'll find & post later.. It is also somewhere in recent archives of comp.ai) =================================================================== John Bro bougie@pine.circa.ufl.edu Univ of Florida bougie@ufpine (Bitnet) Gainesville