I had the pleasure of interacting with him at some point in the early 2000s, maybe 2010. And I found him to be pretty naive too, but especially when it came to brain science. He was thinking that this theory was like vindicated by neuroscience and then also weirdly that it had all this explanatory power. Can you use a theory like this to actually bring about change? Or are we always going to stumble over the fact that we're embedded in the thing that we're trying to transcend so that we can use it properly?
We often think of metaphors as poetic flourishes, a nice way to punctuate your ideas and make them more relatable. But what if metaphors aren’t simply tools of language but part of thought itself? David and Tamler “dive into†George Lakoff’s theory of metaphors and “explore†the implications of his view that metaphors shape and constrain the ways we conceptualize our experience of the world. Plus if we’re really living in cancel culture, we might as well do some cancelling. Say goodbye to "Singing in the Rain," Latinx, and punny academic titles among other things.
Oh and it’s our 250th episode! It’s been quite a journey. Have we come a long way or are we just spinning our wheels? And for a fun detour, check out our bonus podcast series “The Ambulators†on the great TV series Deadwood.
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: