I suspect that we are all close to agreeing on part of this dicussion (but I
could be wrong).
Could we agree that some words are or refer to "categories"?
We might call "categories" "metaphors" (or not). In either case, we might
agree that some words refer to members of "categories". Example: "art" is a
"category" and possibly a metaphor. "Sunday Afternoon on the Grand Jatte" is
a painting, not a category, but could be included in the "category" "art".
You could hit someone with a painting, or shoulder them into it.
"Filth" might be a "category" which might contain as one of its members
"dirt". You could not hit someone with "art"; possibly with "fillth" - but
then "filth" wouldn't be a category. Montaigne might call a "category" a
"name" and "Sunday Afternoon on the Grand Jatte" a thing. Categories/names
....
Perhaps we could agree to disagree regarding whether a category is a
metaphor, but agree that names/categories are abstractions intended to
facilitate communication.
Geoff C
It's always hard to find a good philosopher when you need one.
All generalizations ....
From: Michael Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Examining the theory
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:18:50 -0400
On Sep 24, 2008, at 4:58 PM, William Conger wrote:
Whatever stands for something else can be a metaphor of it because it
evokes the thing without being it by other means
"Can be." Not "always is." There is some ambivalence in that statement.
In any event, your assertion above means that a metaphor is no different
from a sign. But as I use the term, a metaphor is a significantly
different kind of verbal device. A sign points to the thing, it's the name
that points to the substance (to use Montaigne's terms). But a metaphor
asks the reader to compare two dissimilar things and imagine that some
quality of B can be found in A, either in some explicit way or in some
indirect, i.e., "metaphorical," way.
If I say, "I am John," nothing metaphorical happens. I merely say that "I"
and "John" name the same person (a true statement, btw).
If I say, "William is a tiger in an argument," then something metaphorical
happens. Unless I do some great disservice to truth and knowledge, I do
not claim that you and a tiger are the same thing, but only that there is
some quality in "tiger" that can be attributed analogically to you "in an
argument."
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
