ANALOGIES AND METAPHORS Lecturer: charbonneaum@ceu.edu 2 credits, elective Winter 2017 Monday 13:00-14:45 Not a day goes by without any of us using a metaphor or making an analogy between two things. Not only do analogies and metaphors populate our everyday mental and linguistic lives, but they are also ubiquitous in science, philosophy, law, politics, economics, history, art, architecture, and even mathematics. This omnipresence of analogies and metaphors has brought scholarly attention to their function and meaning, the study of which is now decisively interdisciplinary, including important contributions from philosophy, linguistics, cognitive science, and art theory. This seminar approaches analogies and metaphors from an epistemological perspective. The use of analogies will be understood as a form of reasoning and metaphors as tools for thinking. Some of the questions we will address are: Is there a difference between the epistemic import of analogies and metaphors, and if so, how do they differ? What relations do analogies and metaphors have with reasoning and thinking more generally? Can we develop a theory of the meaning of metaphors? Are metaphors merely ornamental and evocative, or can they also participate in human understanding? What is the difference between good and bad analogies, and how can their epistemic import be assessed and warranted? Are analogies and metaphors specifically conceptual and/or linguistic, or can we also speak of material analogies and metaphors? For our investigation, we will exploit the rich and varied set of analogies and metaphors that science offers us. Doing so does not dismiss the importance of analogies and metaphors in other domains of thinking and arguing, but rather it will allow us to take advantage of the large body of epistemic relations and desiderata that science offers us, such as clear similarity-assessment functions, causal models, explanatory format, and so on. Assignments Participation to seminar (20%): Each week, the student is expected to have read the mandatory texts and participate in the discussion. The student will present one mandatory reading of her/his choice on the week to which the reading is assigned and introduce one of the complementary readings of that week. The presentation should not last more than 20 minutes and should be accompanied by a PowerPoint presentation (with one or two slides dedicated to one of the complementary readings of the week). Essay (80%): The student will produce an essay (approximately 2500 words) related to the subjects and problems discussed in class. The student should consult me about the paper s topic, and submit an abstract (around 250 words) before week 11.
Calendar and readings Week 1 (9 th January) THE UBIQUITY OF ANALOGIES AND METAPHORS Introduction to the seminar Bartha, Paul, Analogy and Analogical Reasoning, in. E. N. Zalta (Ed), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/reasoning-analogy/>. Hills, David, Metaphor, in. E. N. Zalta (Ed), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/metaphor/>. PART I METAPHORICAL THINKING Week 2 (16 th January) METAPHOR AND MEANING Davidson, D. (1978). What Metaphor Mean. Critical Inquiry, 5(1), 31-47. Moran, R. (1997). Metaphor. In B. Hale & C. Wright (Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Language (pp. 248-268). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2008). A Deflationary Account of Metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 84-105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Week 3 (23 th January) THE INTERACTIONIST THEORY OF METAPHOR Black, M. (1962). Metaphor in. Black, M. (1962). Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 25-47. Black, M. (1979). More about metaphors. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 19-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2
Week 4 (30 th January) THE CONDUIT METAPHOR Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 164-201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. To be determined Week 5 (6 th February) METAPHOR AND EMBODIMENT Excerpts from Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1979). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. o Chapters 12-14, 18, 21-22 Excerpts from Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1979). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. o Chapters 23-24 o Chapters 26-27 PART II ANALOGICAL REASONING Week 6 (13 th February) ANALOGY AND SIMILARITY Excerpts of Salmon, W. C. (1973). Logic (Second ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. o Pages 97-100 Goodman, N. (1970). Seven Strictures on Similarity. In L. Foster & J. W. Swanson (Eds.), Experience & Theory (pp. 19-29). London: Duckworth. Excerpts from Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & McMahon, K. (2014). Introduction to Logic. Harlow: Pearson. o Chapter 11 (pp. 485-511) Tversky, A. (1977). Features of Similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352. 3
Week 7 (20 th February) ANALOGY AND STRUCTURE Gentner, D. (1983). Structure Mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170. Holyoak, K. J. (2005). Analogy. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning (pp. 117-142). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter3 in. Bartha, P. F. A. (2010). By Parallel Reasoning: The Construction and Evaluation of Analogical Arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical Mapping by Constraint Satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13, 295-355. Week 8 (27 th February) DISANALOGIES, MISANALOGIES, AND MULTIPLE ANALOGIES Shelley, C. (2002b). Analogy Counterarguments and the Acceptability of Analogical Hypotheses. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 53, 477-496. Shelley, C. (2002a). The Analogy Theory of Disanalogy: When Conclusions Collide. Metaphor and Symbol, 17, 81-97. Shelley, C. (1999). Multiple Analogies in Archaeology. Philosophy of Science, 66(4), 579-605. Shelley, C. (2003). Multiple analogies in Plato s Republic. in. Shelley, C. (2003). Multiple Analogies in Science and Philosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 89-112. PART III ANALOGIES AND METAPHORS IN THE SCIENCES Week 9 (6 th March) NATURAL SELECTION AS AN ANALOGY Excerpts of Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. o Chapter 1 Variation under Domestication (pp. 7-43) Ruse, M. (1973). The Value of Analogical Models in Science. Dialogue, 12, 246-253. Largent, M. A. (2009). Darwin's Analogy between Artificial and Natural Selection in the Origin of Species. In M. Ruse & R. J. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the "Origin of Species" (pp. 14-29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4
Ruse, M. (1975). Charles Darwin and Artificial Selection. Journal of the History of Ideas, 36, 339-350. Week 10 (13 th March) NATURAL SELECTION AS A METAPHOR Excerpts of Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. o Chapter 1 Variation under Domestication (pp. 7-43) Young, R. M. (1993). Darwin's metaphor and the philosophy of science. Science as Culture, 3(3), 375-403. Burnett, D. G. (2009). Savage selection: analogy and elision in On the Origins of Species. Endeavour, 33, 120-125. Young, R. M. (1971). Darwin's Metaphor: Does Nature Select? Monist, 55(3), 442-503. Week 11 (20 th March) THE METAPHORICAL FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PROGRAMS Excerpts from Keller, E. F. (2002). Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. o Introduction to Part II o Chapter 4 (pp. 113-147) Excerpts from Lewontin, R. (2000). The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism, and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. o Chapter 1 Gene and Organism (pp. 3-38) 5
Week 12 (27 th March) THE SCIENCE WARS AND THE LEGITIMACY OF INTERDISCIPLINARY METAPHORS Excerpts from Sokal, A., & Bricmont, J. (1998). Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science. New York, NY: Picador. o Introduction and Chapter 7 Maasen, S. (2000). Metaphors in the Social Sciences: Making Use and Making Sense of Them. In F. Hallyn (Ed.), Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences (pp. 199-244). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academics. Maasen, S., & Weingart, P. (2000). The order of meaning: The career of chaos as a metaphor. In. Metaphors and the Dynamics of Knowledge (pp. 91-133). London: Routledge. All mandatory and complementary texts will be made available on the e-learning site or on hold at the university s library. Additional readings Bartha, P. F. A. (2010). By Parallel Reasoning: The Construction and Evaluation of Analogical Arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J., & Kokinov, B. N. (Eds.). (2001). The Analogical Mind: Perspective in Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (Ed.) (2008). The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Hallyn, F. (Ed.) (2000). Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences. Dordrecht: Springer. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1979). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ortony, A. (Ed.) (1993). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shelley, C. (2003). Multiple Analogies in Science and Philosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 6