If you liked this article, be sure to purchase and read "Methaphors we live by", by Lakoff (http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34459.Metaphors_We_Live_B...) It is a great little book that goes into much more detail and analysis of how humans use methaphors and analogy as models to understand the world around us. Highly recommended.
And if you already read it, I for one would welcome further study on these lines if you know it!
Since it's The Economist, I'm surprised they didn't mention one of the most common misleading metaphors I see floating around: that of equating sovereign debt to credit card or household debt. It's used constantly by both Internet commentators and politicians, and it needs to die as soon as possible, because it's completely wrong and leads you to policy conclusions that are the exact opposite of what you need to do.
Not spot on the same issue perhaps, but these sorts of effects are an important reason I cringe at the uptake of newspeak like "alternative facts" by regular media and writers. If you not only let your adversary pick the framing but actively contribute to it, you're placing yourself at a potentially severe disadvantage for no good reason.
The prominence of metaphor to human cognition was put forth in Metaphors We Live By, by Lakoff and Johnson. A fantastic book. Anyone interested in the line of reasoning in the article here should read it.
"Metaphors are like models, only with unclear responsibilities." --Nick Rowe, talking about the use of metaphors to describe economic models.
The ideas that apply to yourself are especially applicable. In regards to stress, I frequently went to relax after school by doing personal projects like a website. After hearing that stress was like a pressure, I assumed I had to set aside time to "destress." I played games instead and felt fine for it, but if I really regret stopping what I was doing.
>This may be one reason why legal systems have historically been rather forgiving of men who go on rampages after too much wifely nagging or losing their jobs.
Since when? Please show me an example of this..
I believe the author is saying that the contextual application of a metaphor can spur illogical thought? Yet it seems odd to limit an imaginative literary tool.
Analogies are similar (or should I say analogous?)
Paywalled article. If your connection is not super fast cancel loading of the page as soon as you see the article.
Are misleading metaphors the issue, or is it just that lots of the stories we tell are misleading? Strange article, it seems to negate itself at the end by pointing out that "declaring war" on things that aren't war is never true and only sometimes helpful.
> “Calories in, calories out” is more than a banal restatement of the Law of Conservation of Energy: it is a metaphor casting the metabolism as akin to a current account. Weight gain is then simply a matter of depositing more than you withdraw. But that ignores the role of hormones and appetite; differences in the way different foods are metabolised and the way the body reacts to prolonged deprivation by hoarding fat and slowing down. No wonder diets rarely work
Speaking of misleading stories, diets do work. People just don't stick to them because they're super difficult. We are hard-wired physiologically to crave food, and it can be near impossible socially to stick to a diet. It's not because something is wrong with the phrase "calories in, calories out". Which isn't even a metaphor, by the way, so why is this diatribe here? This specious argument is saying we should ignore the primary factor and instead worry about the margins. Person to person variance in caloric digestion is in the low percentages for almost everyone. Nearly everyone gets the same 230 calories from McDonalds French fries. Sure, someone might absorb a little more and get 245 and someone else might absorb a little less and get 215, but skipping them is an order of magnitude more effective for everyone.
Despite being paywall, the content is interesing and viewable by canceling the loading as siner posted.
Metaphors and analogies are not tools for critical thinking. When you use a metaphor or an analogy to link two ideas together, you are simply combining things that have no logical connection. It's essentially a quirk of human thought that this type of analogical "reasoning" even exists.
Misleading article:
1. Dismiss stress, by badly redefining what stress is.
2. People "snapping": Just mention it, but do not explain why is a bad metaphor. Maybe he/she deleted the paragraph, maybe he/she do not care for a coherent article?
3. Dismiss healthy food
4. Do not understand DNA
5. more badly explained things
6. “war on drugs” - finally something, but this is PROPAGANDA not a bad metaphor. It is intentional.
7. "War on terror" - I this case, when "war on terror" is "war on ISIS" is not a bad metaphor, they've uniforms and a territory.
FrameWorks Institute is an interesting nonprofit organization — they "empirically identify the most effective ways of reframing social and scientific topics." In other words, replace the misleading metaphors with better ones.
http://www.frameworksinstitute.org/mission.html
For a practical intro, see "How to build a metaphor to change people's minds"
https://aeon.co/essays/how-to-build-a-metaphor-to-change-peo...