Revisions to certain assignments:

What I’ve Learned
January 12:
After the class discussion, I found I had touched on a lot of major points throughout the reading, but left out the most important factor. Aylmer wanted a perfect life. He had the prestige, the fame, and the money. What was not perfect was his wife. To explain this, he said:
‘Ah, upon another face perhaps it might,…‘but never on yours. No, dearest Georgiana, you came so nearly perfect to me from the hand of Nature that this slightest possible defect, which we hesitate to term a defect or a beauty, shocks me, as being the visible mark of earthly imperfection.’

Because his wife was not perfect, Aylmer’s life could not be perfect.

January 19:
I stand by my statement Walton is trying to find out about mankind and its ability to adapt and survive. He gives his reason as trying to discover a passage way to get through the North Pole, but what he is really doing is testing his men to the brink of their determination and their ability. I believe Walton and Frankenstein had similar but ultimately different motives for touring the world. Victor was obsessed with the creation of life, as he made the monster which tore his life apart. He was learning it was much harder to be a creator than he thought.

January 26:
Language has not been a primary tool for communication for as long as I thought. However, from the creation or evolution of human kind, some kind of communication has been in existence. It must be taught to newborns (I am including the monster in this definition of newborns). This is evident, like I wrote in my blog, when the monster says “I cannot describe the delight I felt when I learned the ideas appropriated to each of these sounds and was able to pronounce them.” Language is an evolving idea, but in order for it to keep evolving, it must be taught to each new creature. Frankenstein is not living up to his end of the burden.

February 2:
Making robots that would be able to replace humans is a lofty goal I don’t think we’ll ever be able to achieve. Human beings would never allow it to happen. Frankly, I don’t believe robots can be made to fully imitate human beings. There are too many mechanical and electrical advances we would have to make in a short amount of time to make human-like robots fully operational in our lifetime. Also, without the addition of emotions such as compassion, justice, and many others, robots lack the mental capacity of humans to understand and assess different situations.



February 14:
Following the yellow brick road, in my opinion, is a metaphor for the path of courage. As Dorothy walks through it, she faces many challenges and has to overcome them. She must find the wizard, help her friends, and still get home in one piece. When she encounters the wizard, she must have the courage to uncover him for what he really is—a shy, lonely man who

April 9:
Dynamite is the perfect example to use to show the correlation of anger and its consequences. However, dynamite, like people, doesn’t just explode. At some point, you must have lit the fuse for the other person to be mad at you. The explosion comes after the fuse has expired. This can go along with the “anger=tree” metaphor in the sense that it allows your anger to grow and expand before you explode. The explosion will happen and it is magnificent, but I respectfully disagree with Professor Mandell as I believe the question forgets entirely the role of the fuse. My interpretation is more literal than the question asks us to be, but I think it is merited as just another way of looking at the metaphor.

The switch from sense impression to sense data occurred around the time scientists ended most of their work with television, and started to experiment with the reception of other data. The third definition from the Oxford English Dictionary was taken from the 1946 Ann. Computation Lab from Harvard University. “The quantities, characters, or symbols on which operations are performed by computers and other automatic equipment, and which may be stored or transmitted in the form of electrical signals, records, on magnetic tape or punched cards, etc.,” it reads.

Believing the effect of memory on the mind was a “sense impression” relied on a series of thought that was missing at the time. Before the computer, television (technically, for my point, photography) and radio were the two most used mediums for thought. In a photograph, what people saw was an impression of an event they would like to keep. Imagine all the people who still claim to have a photographic memory. All they can remember is what they saw on that day. The data was unable to change with how you remember the event. A new theory applying to sense data is the possibility to alter your memory, or twist your memories into something else.

Using the metaphor the associates the brain with a computer is definitely a lot more descriptive of a brain. When making an impression, there are not many chemicals changing and processes running in order for you to make the impression. The computer/brain metaphor allows for those to be considered and examined. Many people refer to the motherboard of a computer as the “brain” of the computer as it can perform many complex tasks. Going with this metaphor, however, brings one big problem: how are events entered into the mind? My belief is that we have not totally moved away from the impression process. We are still stuck in a transition stage where memory is implanted into our brains which we are then free to mold and modify as we see fit.

The printing press helped us see the way in which memories are entered into our mind, as I just said. Until the invention of the computer, people also thought impressions were the way most memories stayed on the mind as well. This model also helped us understand the foundation of our brains. Had it not been for the invention of the printing press, we could not have made the distinction of how our mind processes information.

I think J.M. Balkin, who wrote Cultural Software, has the right impression. “Some philosophers of mind have gone so far as to argue that the human mind is virtually indistinguishable from a computer….,” he says. The brain as a computer metaphor has built on the impression metaphor in order to advance our knowledge of the brain. Describing synapses like circuits on the motherboard is an obvious way of explaining information processing in the brain. I might claim the motherboard was modeled after the brain. You can see the multiple similarities, especially in the input-output processing through each. They are very similar and could be mistaken.

Metaphors:

• Brain chemistry exchanges is like a washing machine.
• Blue moods to an improperly tuned radio
• Mental tuning=radio
• Intellect in terms of building monuments
• Brain can be fixed by correcting “traumatic scenes.”
• Thoughts and knowledge as a machine
• Hysteria leads to repression

One of the major consequences we face when we compare the brain or intellect to an inanimate object is the risk of understating the brains importance to the body. The mind is an incredibly complex and bizarre organ requiring intense study. Many of the objects in “Current Ideas about How the Mind Works” need great skill to be operated but none of them can function to the capacity of a human brain. I feel that comparing its processes to a washing machine is an easy way to explain it to a child, but when people are older, you must go more in-depth with your explanation.

I also think the ideas by Freud don’t connect with most of the population. If all people had brains like Freud believes in “The Aetiology of Hysteria,” we would be an arrogant society. He talks about erecting buildings, saying “when [the inscriptions] have been translated, yield undreamed-of information about the events of the remote past, to commemorate which the monuments were built.” The small clip of the article immediately made me think of an intelligent entrepreneur who uses the rubble in order to build a town as a monument to himself and his abilities.

Overall though, I believe these metaphors can do more good than harm. They provide us with an easy way to explain multiple ideas about the brain, such as its processes, how we think, and psychoanalysis. We need metaphors like the ones given in the reading in order to help us think in simpler ways about problems.

The main difference I see with believe unusual behavior as a disease and unusual behavior as a product of possession is the fact that prayer can “cure” unusual behavior as possession. In “A True and Most Dreadfull Discourse of a Woman Possessed by the Devill” the point that early medical cures relied on prayer rather than the work of a doctor. “… Yet the Devil who always both builds his Chapel so near as he may to God’s Church, began to withdraw from Prayer…” it is written, denoting the work of the possessor overcoming the woman’s prayer. Had she acted like she did today I am much surer a doctor would have had her committed to a psych ward.

I believe we do treat Eve different than we would Margaret Cooper, or any other person who is diagnosed with multiple personality disorder. Back when this Discourse was written we did not have the medical knowledge we have now, so there was no way for them to realize what Eve was suffering from at the time. Rabies, which characteristically makes people foam at the mouth and experience delusions, but would have been impossible for the townspeople to treat, but it doesn’t explain how the other seven people in the house saw the same bear Eve did. Eve is treated from a religious standpoint, which would include multiple prayers, no counseling, and many physical attempts to force the spirit from her body; whereas Cooper would find a world of counseling, support, and psychotherapeutic drugs to help her in her fight.

Cooper and Eve are not held accountable in different ways because that would imply there was a way to stop it without treatment. It would be a problem they could turn on and off at will. While I do not believe in the theory of possession by evil demons, considering the beliefs of those times I would have to argue there was little a person who was possessed or psychologically ill could be held accountable for doing. Often, people with multiple personalities are not aware they have changed personalities and part of them “blacks out.” To hold them accountable while in this state would be worthless, as they would remember none of it when they came back to their regular personality.

Not having seen The Three Faces of Eve, I feel it would be inappropriate and also ill-advised for me to comment on what Ian Hacking would say about it. At first glance, it would appear Hacking would accept a model such as the one given in “A True and Most Dreadfull Discourse,” but upon further investigation one finds that while he mentions the soul, he neither credits nor discredits the theory of possession. In my mind, Hacking would advocate an early childhood shock as the cause rather than true psychological illness. “A disturbed type of behavior has been joined to events in early childhood that may surface in memory,” he wrote, explaining how childhood events can cause unexpected behavior in a person’s adult years. The theory of possession does not fit that definition, as a demon can possess you at any point in your lifetime.

“My friend, the swift mule, fleet wild ass of the mountain, panther of the wilderness, after we joined together and went up into the mountain, fought the Bull of Heaven and killed it, and overwhelmed Humbaba, who lived in the Cedar Forest, now what is this sleep that has seized you?” - (Trans. Kovacs, 1989)—From the Epic of Gilgamesh

A metaphor like the one above will make an average person feel lower than average. The author compares his friend to 3 animals: the mule, known for its reliability and resourcefulness; the “wild ass of the mountain,” which is kind of like a mule, but more surefooted in the mountains; and finally the “panther of the wilderness,” endlessly stalking about for predators. The author portrays his friend as a combination of these animals, picturing him as a well equipped person.

"The ultimate hypocrite is not Comedy Central -- that's their decision not to show the image of Mohammed or not -- it's Parker and Stone," he said. "Like little whores, they'll sit there and grab the bucks. They'll sit there and they'll whine and they'll take their shot at Jesus. That's their stock in trade."

The speaker is equating Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of “South Park,” to a life of greed and misery. When most people think of whores, they think of loose women, but here they are actually speaking about people who would take pot shots at anyone for the right amount of money. This probably wouldn’t affect public policy, but it would make a lot of executives and public officials be under more public scrutiny.

“The War on Drugs”

A favorite of many administrations, the drug fight has increased multiple times (i.e. it was not always the “war on drugs”). This has set a matter of public policy, saying that we are treating drugs like a human enemy. While it allows us to use a large amount of firepower, people are distrustful of anything with “war” in the name. We’ve even named “drug lords” and our leader in the drug fight is a “drug czar.”

“He is a monster.”

Being compared to a monster has definite negative connotations. It is hard to imagine what people think of when the word monster is used, but like we discussed earlier with Frankenstein, a monster is something that people stare at. This, like the first two, really has no public policy effect, but these three do affect how people are seen. People who are compared with one of the above metaphors or a variation are usually not seen in a good light. It hurts their reputations and in the case of politicians, their chances of reelection.

While one of the most often thought of metaphors for “anger=dynamite” it noted on the question, in my mind it is a very clichéd statement. It is highly relevant, but I believe a much better metaphor would be to explain the “anger=dynamite” metaphor in terms of fuses. People often say “anger has a short fuse.” The same quote can be used for dynamite. Once you light the fuse, it is only a short time before the reaction happens. When you light your anger “fuse,” you can only let the anger simmer in your mind for so long. After a certain amount of time, expect to blow up on someone. Perhaps my belief and the belief posed within the question are in dialogue with each other though—when your lit fuse has expired, dynamite explodes. When somebody has angered you, your fuse has been lit. It is only a matter of time before you “explode with rage” onto that person.

A large aspect I think the anger=dynamite metaphor hides is the ability to explode on the spot. Like I noted above, when you use dynamite in a metaphor people think of fuses and timing. A stick of dynamite will not explode immediately when lit. However, it does greatly showcase the probability of anger to simmer and become greater after the fuse has been lit. Another hidden aspect of this is the possibility the person who is angry will not explode; rather, they will absorb the anger and deal with the situation rationally.

The metaphor Blake gives us is “anger=tree.” He explains when he chose not to tell his foe about his wrath, rather to hide it “with soft deceitful wiles,” his wrath started to grow inside of him. The anger grew inside him like a tree and eventually poisoned him until it possessed him, living in him. I think Blake’s metaphor completely leaves out the reaction of the person who really should be angry—the foe. Blake does a good job laying out a process, though. For example, the subject’s wrath grew “till it bore an apple bright,” meaning until fruitition of a plan. Also like the anger=dynamite metaphor Blake has described an on-going process. Anger is not something rising up in you that you address. An angry person has to let the anger rest within him- or herself before he or she addresses it. Some sentences which would put Blake’s metaphor into ordinary language would be: “The anger grew in me,” “I finally got to the point I had to do something,” “I’ve been planning revenge on him or her for making me mad,” or “I have to let him know how angry I am—not by words, but by actions.”

A. Well, not exactly. The ordinary sentence "She'll rise to the top" relies on the metaphor STATUS = UP (number 7). Check p. 16 of Metaphors We Live By.

• B. Yes, in the conceptual structure underlying ordinary sentence "All upcoming events are listed in the paper," Future events are UP (number 6).

• C. Yes, in the ordinary sentence "She is morally upright, and an upstanding citizen," Virtue is UP (number 9).

• D. Yes. Here being UP is being awake and conscious. Number 2 is correct.

While of course it is good to be on top of things, being on top really means being in control; the sentence "I am on top of the situation" shows that, in our thinking, HAVING CONTROL is UP (number 4). Check p. 15 of Metaphors We Live By.

F. Hmmm. The category of experience expressed by the sentence is emotion. Do you see emotions on the list of possible metaphors? Take a look again:

1. HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN
2. CONSCIOUS IS UP; UNCONSCIOUS IS DOWN
3. HEALTH AND LIFE ARE UP; SICKNESS AND DEATH ARE DOWN
4. HAVING CONTROL OR FORCE ARE UP; BEING SUBJECT TO CONTROL OR FORCE IS DOWN
5. MORE IS UP; LESS IS DOWN
6. FUTURE EVENTS ARE UP (and AHEAD)
7. STATUS IS UP; LOW STATUS IS DOWN
8. GOOD IS UP; BAD IS DOWN
9. VIRTUE IS UP; DEPRAVITY IS DOWN
10. RATIONAL IS UP; EMOTIONAL IS DOWN

Happiness and sadness are emotions (number 1). Remember that emotions are something that are not physical, that cannot be grabbed and felt with our hands. Placing happiness UP and sadness DOWN is a way of making them comprehensible to us. Is this metaphor connected to Judy Collins's song do you think?

G. The key words in the sentence "He couldn't rise above his emotions" are "rise above": in a healthy (rational) person, the sentence implies, emotions are lower than thought processes, so the underlying conceptual structure here is number 10. Check p. 17 of Metaphors We Live By.

• H. Yes, good work: to say a number is going "up" seems literal, but it is in fact metaphorical: there is no physical reason that we could not switch meanings in our language for "countdown" and "counting up."

I. Well, when you say that things are looking up, usually what you mean is that things were bad and now they are better -- now they are good. So number 8 is the correct answer. Check p. 16 of Metaphors We Live By.

J. Well, not exactly. This song is not so much about the way things are in the world as it is about the way things are perceived depending upon a person's emotions. In the first stanza, UP and DOWN refer to states of feeling in the singer, don't they?