PDA

View Full Version : Metaphor: Unconscious Catalyst of Thought


coberst
10th December 2008, 04:38 PM
Metaphor: Unconscious Catalyst of Thought

Many years ago while rummaging in a used book store I decided to buy “Human Evolution Coloring Book”, I wanted to learn more about evolution. I learned all about how the hand evolved from the fin—or was it the gills—of fish. I looked in vain for a description of how my reasoning ability evolved from the fish.

“Philosophy in The Flesh” by George Lakoff, linguist, and Mark Johnson, philosopher, that I discovered at my local community college library several months ago finally helped me understand this, which since Darwin must be an obvious connection.

Darwin’s theory declares that human capacity grows out of animal capacity but until I discovered this book PTF no one had given me any idea how this is possible. I studied a little philosophy but it never made much sense to me how pure reason with a dichotomy of mind and body could be inherited from tadpoles.

In the last three decades linguists, neuroscientists, philosophers, and others utilizing the scientific method of empirical study have organized a new cognitive theory that is described in this book. These ‘cognitive scientists’ from many differing domains of knowledge speak of themselves as experimentalists. The theory might properly be called the embodied mind. I think that this theory will one day become the only functional paradigm of a new cognitive science.

We normally think of metaphors as merely linguistic means to associate an unknown with a known. ‘Understand is grasp’ is one common metaphor ‘more is up’ is another. The woods are full of such common metaphors and these metaphors are much more than meet the uninitiated eye.

Metaphor theory claims that almost all cognitive action, more than 95%, takes place unconsciously. Metaphors, as we commonly know them, are conscious phenomena but metaphors are more importantly unconscious happenings in tadpoles and in humans. All creatures with neural capacity categorize, conceptualize, and infer; the principal characteristics of reasoning. Here, in metaphors, we see how human reason is connected to tadpole existence.

A standard technique for checking out new ideas is to create computer models of the idea and subject that model to simulated conditions to determine if the model behaves as does the reality. Such modeling techniques are used constantly in projecting behavior of meteorological parameters.

Neural computer models have shown that the types of operations required to perceive and move in space require the very same type of capability associated with reasoning. That is, neural models capable of doing all of the things that a body must be able to do when perceiving and moving can also perform the same kinds of actions associated with reasoning, i.e. inferring, categorizing, and conceiving.


Throughout our life we constantly make judgments about such abstract matters as difference, importance, difficulty, and morality, and we have subjective experiences such as affection, desire, love, intimacy and achievement. Cognitive science claims that the manner in which we conceptualize and reason about these matters are determined, to one extinct or another, by sensorimotor domains of experience. CS claims that, in many cases, early experiences of normal mundane manipulations of objects become the prototypes from which these later concrete and abstract judgments are made.

“When we conceptualize understanding an idea (subjective experience) in terms of grasping an object (sensorimotor experience) and failing to understand an idea as having it go right by us or over our heads” we are using a sensorimotor experience as the metaphor for the subjective experience. The metaphor ‘understand is grasp’ results from our conflating a sensorimotor happening with a later subjective experience.

Metaphor is a standard means we have of understanding an unknown by association with a known. When we analyze the metaphor ‘bad is stinky’ we will find: we are making a subjective judgment wherein the olfactory sensation becomes the source of the judgment. ‘This movie stinks’ is a subjective judgment and it is made in this manner because a sensorimotor experience is the structure for making this judgment.

Why is the premise “A straight line is the shortest distance between two points” self-evident. It is because this is one of the first things an infant learns and it is verified and reinforced constantly throughout life by our sensorimotor experiences. The metaphor ‘more is up’ is not so pervasive in our experience but its rationale is similar.

If we recognize metaphor as a means to associate something new with something old, something known with something unknown, we can begin to understand what CS is proposing in this revolutionary theory. CS is presenting a theory based upon empirical evidence gathered by the combined effort of linguists, philosophers, and neural physicists that metaphor is a very necessary element of our ability to reason as we do.

We normally think of metaphor as a tool of language whereby one can enlighten another by making an association of an unknown with a known. CS is making a much more radical use of metaphor.

CS is claiming that the neural structure of sensorimotor experience is mapped onto the mental space for another experience that is not sensorimotor but subjective and that this neural mapping, which is unconscious and automatic, serves as part of the “DNA” of the subjective experience. The sensorimotor experience serves the role of an axiom for the subjective experience.

schrodinger
10th December 2008, 08:25 PM
The progression of knowledge always proceeds from what is known to what is unknown; it can not happen any other way! That process involves seeing associations and relationships and making logical deductions and inductions to form new associations and relationships. This is, in fact, the “scientific method” and is very well understood. What is the point in calling this a metaphor? A metaphor is just a figure of speech and certainly does not represent any breakthrough in cognitive science or understanding. I see absolutely nothing new in this so-called “cognitive science”; just old wine in a new bottle. Now, there is a metaphor for you!

coberst
10th December 2008, 08:55 PM
The OP is an attempt to point out that SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) informs us that conceptual metaphors happen whether we like it or not. Our unconscious thought processes transports concepts from physical experiences throughout our store house of subjective concepts.

Chan Tiger
12th December 2008, 09:54 AM
I have to agree with Schrodinger: while this discovery may have been something of an epiphany for you personally, Coberst, I don't see anything particularly ground-breaking or earth-shattering about your stance on this topic. Philosophy in the Flesh has been out for almost a decade now, and the ideas discussed in the book are much, much older. While this may be news to the Anglo-American tradition of 'analytic' philosophy, it's old hat to anyone who's been paying attention to Continental philosophy. The notion of "embodiment" was first seriously examined by Maurice Merleau-Ponty, who in turn was largely expanding upon ideas proposed by Heidegger. This means the basic premise of your original post has been around since the beginning of the 20th century, and probably even earlier.

More interesting to me are the implications of embodiment. Hubert Dreyfus, for instance, argues (rather convincingly, in my opinion) that until artificial intelligence researchers take seriously the notion of "being-in-the-world" (i.e. context, which is directly related to the fact we have bodies) the quest for AI will not bear fruit. He lays out this argument in What Computers Can't Do and the updated version What Computers Still Can't Do*.


* (The original version came out in 1979, a whole twenty years before Philosophy in the Flesh, and the redux was published in 1992, also before PiF. While these are very interesting ideas, it's a mistake to think they are radically new. They are very much in keeping with the general thrust of phenomenology, as it's developed in the past 100 years. Thus Lakoff's claim of a "challenge" to "Western Philosophy" is extremely overstated. These ideas are the culmination of a century of Western philosophy!)

coberst
12th December 2008, 06:34 PM
SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) has given us a new additional meaning of the word "metaphor".

They have defined the conceptual metaphor. The conceptual metaphor is much like the linguistic metaphor except it happens without the aid of conscious thought and in effect maps the inference patterns from one concrete concept into an abstract concept. If one takes the effort to comprehend this revolutionary idea one can better comprehend how we humans function.