[FRIAM] Metaphor [POSSIBLE DISTRACTON FROM]: privacy games

[Frank Wimberly]

Steve,

After thinking about them I think curved manifolds are real just as right
triangles.  Perhaps my introspection deludes me.

I think you agree with me about thinking without language.  Sometimes.  In
the morning I don't think, "Now I am going to open this cabinet to get a
bowl..."

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Thu, May 28, 2020, 9:11 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

> Frank -
>
> My first  reaction:  I don't think "bent space time" is a metaphor.  I
> don't use metaphor in thought because I know exactly what I "mean".
>
> unless space-time is a plastic/elastic solid (solid aether?), I'm not sure
> what the phrase means if not metaphorically?  If I want to talk about
> space-time in this way more rigorously, I would not "bend" it, I would
> describe it's geometry as non-euclidean.   I would claim that we
> metaphorically "bend" space-time *relative* to the idealized euclidean
> space we all (most all?) apprehend somewhat directly (though our visual
> system apprehends space in perspective geometry where objects are
> consistently smaller by a factor of 1/r where r is their distance from
> us).  Sound is somewhat more complicated but also has a 1/r component.
>
> I'm not even sure I use language in thought except when I'm planning an
> email, for instance.
>
> Frank/Eric -
>
> I do agree that the idea of "metaphors all the way down" shift a little
> across this boundary.   A lot of my own "thinking" is not explicitly
> linguistic, but it *is* imagistic and involves analogs (analogies?), much
> like an analog computer (of which there are many modes and examples, not
> all electronic) operates perhaps?    I think I related here that I was
> dreaming in "celestial mechanics" for a while.  I don't know enough details
> about celestial mechanics to believe I was really honestly "calculating"
> orbits and orbit-changes, etc... in any useful/literal way,  I was just
> "experiencing" what it *might* be like to somewhat directly control
> thrusters with conserved energy and reaction mass whilst "feeling"
> energetic isoclines in delta-v/gravity space.
>
> I didn't experience "bent space" so much as the same kind of dissonance I
> feel when I try to think of great-circle navigation on a map  or even more
> entertaining/complicated, whilst in the context of winds (sailing/flying)
> and currents/tides.   My visual site-lines serve me fairly well, up to the
> curvature of the earth, which would continue to serve me well in
> interplanetary scale locomotion/navigation, yet if my propulsion method
> includes a solar-sail (and/or magnetic induction aspects)
>
> I think that "metaphor" is used more in science to communicate with
> outsiders and as shorthand (e.g. "bent" spacetime) among insiders.  This is
> where I will defer my language to Glen's appeals to switch to (my idea of
> what he would ask for) analogy, formal analogy, mathematical models, formal
> mappings within mathematical formulations.   My only shot for metaphor at
> this level is to refer to Lakoff/Nunez's "Where Mathematics Comes From"
> which I claim provides a good argument for how even mathematics is
> technically/fundamentally metaphorical.  But rather than insist on that
> (for no good reason), I am happy to converge on the use of the other
> (analogy, model, mapping) terms.  I think Glen asked me for something like
> this directly offlist many months ago and I can't remember if I actually
> said out loud that I was accepting that.  (I hope I am characterizing
> Glen's position and our interaction accurately).
>
> - Steve
>
> Eric Charles wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I follow all the different sticking points this conversation
>> has developed... but I'm gonna risk punch the tar baby anyway...
>>
>> I'm not sure Glen's point about "xyz" gets us very far. Sure, you can
>> call anything you want by any label you want. I'm not sure anyone disputes
>> that. But after that there remain three-ish different issues, which I think
>> Nick tends to muddle:
>>
>> 1) The role of metaphor in communication.
>> 2) The role of metaphor in thought.
>> 3) The role of metaphor in science.
>>
>>
>>
>
>> Did I punch the tar baby enough? Am I hopelessly stuck? Or did I possibly
>> help accomplish anything?
>>
> Tar Babies R Us!
>
> I think you accomplished something for me... your 3 domains above are
> useful to me and I hope my response registered somewhat to them, with
> Frank's counter/example of "bent space" is helpful to you or others.
>
> I will leave the "toe/tow the line" metaphors alone here.  I find the
> *expanded* etymology of metaphors fascinating, especially when juxtoposed
> phonographically as is this pair, but do think it is probably a distraction
> from the point at hand.
>
> - Steve
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. .
> ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200528/8da15c04/attachment.html>