Metaphors And Cognition

From TheValueOfDomainModels :

I think that is the issue that separates us [Costin & Michael]. I like metaphors, they help me see things in different ways and consolidate understanding. I agree that there are some hazards, but to me the come from forgetting that you are using a metaphor, or never considering more than one. There are cognitive scientists who claim that metaphor is the basis of cognition. That idea really hit me hard, but I agree with it these days. -- MichaelFeathers

The difficulty is the mapping of existing metaphors to new domains in such a way as to enable reasoning and understanding. This is proves very difficult in non-trivial source and target domains. The base metaphors for humans revolve around our bodies and through many mappings can be used to understand a great deal. The main metaphors for programming have been the computer itself, which have proved limiting. OO is in some way an attempt to build programming on human metaphorical systems. In practice this is very difficult in complex domains because humans have such different experiences and reasoning patterns. --AnonymousDonor

What is most interesting to me is to try and experience other people's way of thinking so I could have a better informed choice for each particular situation.

Interested in metaphor? Take a look at the work of GeorgeLakoff. In particular:

Those are right to the point. For a general intro to CognitiveScience, PaulThagard?'s is good. The program of cognitive science is to understand how the mind functions through experimentation and observation. In a nutshell, the mind works less logically than most people suspect. -- MichaelFeathers

I'm currently reading DouglasHofstadter's FluidConceptsAndCreativeAnalogies, in which the point that the making of analogies and metaphors underlies intelligence is made quite forcefully. -- LaurentBossavit

It's interesting at the cellular level the machinery is not magical, it's based on electricity, pumps, ratchets, etc., normal mechanical principles. They are just really small and very clever. For cognition we have to find the same thing. What are the base mechanisms that may seem magical when viewed at the higher layer, but make sense at the lower level? Metaphor is a mapping based in simple pattern matching, which is mechanical. It seems reasonable that many levels of mapping built on top of each other could be what accounts for "intelligence." --AnonymousDonor

Quite. For a dissenting point of view, try RogerPenrose's ShadowsOfTheMind (ISBN 0195106466 ). -- lb

'Shadows of the mind' has some serious flaws --- Penrose has address some of them since....

Anyone have a definition of "quite" ? Does it mean "you silly child" or something similar?

Quite just means yes. It's an English thing :).

Though I'm french. Go figure. Another book of interest is Darwin's Dangerous Idea, by DanDennett? - a good part is devoted to refuting the claim that "science has no proper means to investigate the nature of human knowledge", more or less along the lines suggested by Anon above ("many levels of mapping built on top of each other", or, to use Dennett's alluring term, a "cascade of cranes"). Does some damage to Penrose along the way. -- lb

See GodInKnowledge

EditText of this page (last edited October 31, 2003) or FindPage with title or text search