Back to Visuals Page
Back to Teaching Page

Metaphorical Thinking

Mary LeCron Foster: Suggested a link between symmetry in hominid tools and language ability

 

Mark Turner, Professor, Department of English and affiliated with the Center for Neural and Cognitive Sciences at the University of Maryland, author of The Literary MindArgues that metaphor is basic to the neurobiological architecture of the human brain.


 

Metaphor (Robbins p. 67): taking language from one domain of experience and applying it to another domain


 

Key Metaphor (Robbins p. 70):Metaphor a particular society applies to a wide range of domains of experience


 

We can think of a key metaphor as an organizing frame of reference, a way of telling stories to explain things which happen or which should happen.


 

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (1930s): language and language structure affects perception


 
 

Understanding Ritual





Edward Tylor (1832-1917): He believed that people in non-industrial societies were more ‘primitive’ than people in industrial societies and that they offered the key to understanding why people believe in god and other ‘irrational’ things.


 

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917): He suggested that people created god as a way of understanding the power of society.To him, religious rituals served to bind people together and reproduce the social order (keep the society going).


 

Roy Rappaport (1926-1997): He extended some of Durkheim’s ideas and tried to explain how rituals develop, how they do what they do.For example, he suggested that rituals help to overcome the fact that people can use language to lie to one another.Rituals do not lie.They answer yes-no questions like : Are you one of us? Do you support us?


 
 

Questions anthropologists ask about religious beliefs


 

·Where do the beliefs come from? 


 

·What do they do for societies? 


 

1. How are they related to the societies in which they are found? 


 

2. Do they play any role in keeping communities (including at the level of the society) together? 


 

3.Do they play a role in telling people how to behave in society, how to get along, how to improve the world?


 

·What do the beliefs do for people?


 

1. What questions do they answer?


 

2. What life transitions, moments, dothey help people get through? 


 

3. What else do they do (emotional ‘highs’, etc.)


 
 

The ‘Second Spear’/Two levels of causation


 

1.What natural forces afflicted you? (which is where we tend to stop) 


 

2.And--Why? (Why did it happen to YOU 

in particular?)


 
 

Possible features of Liminality
Contrasted to Everyday Social Structure


Liminality
Normal Social Structure
transition
state
homogeneity
heterogeneity
communitas
structure
equality
inequality
anonymity
names
absence of property
property
absence of status
status
nakedness or uniform dress
dress distinctions
sexual continence or excess
sexuality
minimization of sex distinctions
maximization of sex distinctions
absence of rank
rank
humility
pride
disregard of personal appearance
care for personal appearance
unselfishness
selfishness
total obedience
obedience only to superior rank
sacredness
secularity
sacred instruction
technical knowledge
silence
speech
simplicity
complexity
acceptance of pain and suffering
avoidance of pain and suffering

(from Conrad Kottak 1991, p. 338)

 

Questions to Ask Ourselves

Concerning Our Own Beliefs and Assumptions

1.Can there be explanations for why and how things happen, in addition to scientific ones?
 

2. Can explanations that seem to contradict science also be ‘true’?
 
 

3.  Is science a way of explaining things not just so that we understand, but in a language we understand and according to beliefs we share and think are true?


 
 
 
 

Possibilities for Considering Other Worldviews




Explanation:  We can try to explain why it makes sense for people to believe and behave as they do—in terms of maintaining a strong sense of community, of keeping the community functioning, and so forth.
 
 

Translation: We can think of belief systems and their accompanying explanations for things as something we need to translate into terms we can understand.

 

Context-Specific Truth:  Explanations we ordinarily cannot accept may become true for us if we actively participate in the context in which those explanations arise.