Open Thinkering

Menu

TB871: Metaphorical linguistic expressions

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

Activity P2.9 asks us to identify “metaphorical linguistic expressions used by stakeholders when describing or making sense of situations” in my area of practice. I’m focused on the use of libraries, in general but particularly in Northumberland. More specifically, issues affecting their use.

In general, I think it’s fair to say that the majority of the population think that libraries are quiet, unexciting places. So if pushed for a metaphor, we might find words like ‘sanctuary’ or ‘refuge.’ Librarians and those who love books (like me!) might see things differently, and use terms such as ‘diving into research’ or ‘unlocking a treasure trove of information’ which makes things sound a bit more exciting.

In addition to the Dewey decimal system, libraries tend to have collections of books which have been arranged around a theme. This ‘curation’ by librarians is akin to what art galleries might do with works of art, and putting books on display treats them as less of a commodity and more like art works.

Libraries are more than just about physical books, though, and as I sit in Morpeth library there is a corner dedicated to ‘Business & IP Centre North East’ whose materials enjoin visitors to ‘Join a thriving business community in your local library.’ Although I’ve only ever seen someone sit there bored, scrolling through their phone, waiting for people to arrive, I suppose the metaphor in use is something akin to knowledge being an ‘engine of growth.’

Some libraries play an important role in teaching digital skills to the community. This can be important particularly if people need to be able to claim benefits or look for jobs, which these days are both digital-first activities. Council members or senior administrators might therefore talk about ‘investing in digital infrastructure’ and then ‘harvesting data’ from users to improve services.

So we have a range of metaphors in play with libraries: everything from art galleries, to construction, to agricultural metaphors. As Laura and I have explained on the WAO blog, metaphors are powerful things which can unlock mental models in audiences that lead to different actions being taken. I can’t help but think that library services could do a better job about being more intentional about the metaphors they use in their communications.

TB871: Metaphor, ambiguity, and conceptual blending

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

I’m managing to skip quite a few activities in this module because I’ve thought through the impact of metaphor and ambiguity before, in quite some depth. In fact, I’ve got a whole other blog on it. This post is prompted by the mention of ‘conceptual blending’ in the module materials:

Cognitive scientists Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner (2002) have written about what they call conceptual blending, which is the human mind’s general ability to match two or more different inputs – such as images, words, events, frames, identities or even embodied actions – and to selectively project elements from those different inputs and create a new, blended mental space that has its own structure that retains a connection to those original inputs. They share a range of examples where new mental spaces are produced, including life-stage rituals, sporting achievements and political commentary.

[…]

Significantly, the theory of conceptual blending argues that positions, such as ideas or arguments derived in the blended mental space, can have an effect on our thinking. Consequently, perceptions and judgements about situations involving any of the initial input spaces are modified. Metaphor seems to fit with this way of understanding the mind because it brings together two different notions into a single whole. The boss and dinosaur become an imaginary boss–dinosaur composite. Tutsi and cockroach become a single conceptual blended whole, which could then influence cognition and behaviour in relation to Tutsis or cockroaches.

(The Open University, 2020)
Two overlapping circles, on labelled 'connotative aspect' and one labelled 'denotative aspect'. There is an arrow pointing to the overlap.

Very briefly, then, when we yoke together two ideas we create a zeugma or syllepsis — for example ‘digital literacy’. Or more simply, if we look at prehistoric example, the idea of a “lion man”. Is the emphasis on the first of these (digital/lion) or on the second (literacy/man)? In other words, are we talking about literacy of the digital, or digital forms of literacy. Likewise, are we talking about a man who act like a lion, or a lion that resembles a man?

At the overlap of what something denotes and what it connotes is a space of ambiguity. This is where space is opened up for new ideas and creative/playful thinking. However, there are different types of ambiguity, which I’ve written about in length, including in my thesis, but which I’ll summarise here using this diagram:

Continuum of ambiguity ranging from Generative Ambiguity, through Creative Ambiguity, Productive Ambiguity, and 'Dead Metaphors#

Given that all communication is in some way ambiguous, what we’re trying to avoid are what Richard Rorty calls “dead metaphors”. These are terms which may have had some explanatory power but which have now devolved into cliche.

This is how disinformation works: it creates a space between things that definitely exist and puts them together in people’s minds in such a way that it creates connections that just aren’t there. Political slogans, marketing materials, and even the way that society in general refers to certain groups can be made more or less ambiguous. For change to happen, I’d argue, things need to be productively ambiguous.

References

TB871: Primary metaphors

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

I’ve got a couple of books by George Lakoff sitting waiting in my home office ready for me to read. I really should get around to them. Here he is explaining how fundamental metaphor is to our experience, including literally rewiring the brain.

The argument that Lakoff and others make is that some primary metaphors are embedded in the means by which we come to experience and perceive the world and how those embodied experiences then influence how we conceive, make sense of and come to know about it. These metaphors both reflect the experiences we have in the world and come to influence the mental models, frames or conceptual systems that we hold and which influence our perception. The metaphors that we use influence our mental models.

(The Open University, 2020)

When it comes to systems thinking, part of what we need to be mindful of is the kinds of metaphors and similes people use to describe the systems within which they operate. This reminds me of Gareth Morgan’s book Images of Organization.

References

css.php