REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

George Lakoff on Politics and the Mind

POSTED BY: HKCAVALIER
UPDATED: Thursday, June 26, 2008 01:32
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 928
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, June 21, 2008 11:48 AM

HKCAVALIER


Found this on YouTube. Like a lot of funny, insightful commentators Cenk Uygur becomes little more than a nuisance when interviewing a first-rate mind. So, you know, just try to tune him out as best you can and listen to Lakoff.



HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 21, 2008 12:58 PM

CITIZEN


Has the idea that reason and emotion can't be wholly separated really not been suggested before?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 6:09 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 7:24 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.



I will defer to you on this one, since you obviously have so much more practice at it...



Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 7:29 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.



I will defer to you on this one, since you obviously have so much more practice at it...



Mike




Ooooooh... you nailed me on that one !! Drat you!

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 8:04 AM

HKCAVALIER


Yeh, Citizen, a lot of his research is now a decade old or more. I was mostly impressed with his synthesis of ideas. His analysis of the liberal mindset being a hold-over from the Enlightenment really seemed to nail it for me. His observation that narrative and metaphor create our contexts for reason was spot on.

The idea that the Republicans, coming from a business narrative/metaphor, have been trying to sell their worldview seams abundantly clear. And the idea that the Democrats have been simply trying to "lay out the facts" so they can "speak for themselves" seems to me to be exactly what Rue and Signy, f'rinstance, have been doing on this board for years now, with about as much success as the Democratic Party in Washington. The facts are not enough, because the facts are dependent on our personal narratives/metaphors that create the context for interpreting the facts. Just look how the "love of America" narrative gets thrown at Rue and Signy over and over again. "How can you love something and be such a harsh critic of it?" is the simplistic narrative that rules these debates in RWED. It begs the question of "What is America?" Is it George W. Bush? Is it the Constitution? Is it we the People?

I see Barack Obama's astonishing success stemming from his masterful application of narrative and metaphor in his campaign. Just look at his continual use of the word "broken" to describe the ideas he opposes. And watch the Republicans trying to fend off "broken." They can't do it. All they can do is counter with "not broken" and the American people just shake our heads 'cause we know that ain't true.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 8:06 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.


AURaptor, please, try to be civil.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 8:12 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.


AURaptor, please, try to be civil.

.



How is that not being civil ? I don't agree with his views, I find them baseless and ridiculous. There, NOW I'm edging toward not being civil, but have still yet to cross the line of civility.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 10:12 AM

HKCAVALIER


AURaptor, I think you've been trashing people for so long, you don't realize you're doing it.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 4:02 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
AURaptor, I think you've been trashing people for so long, you don't realize you're doing it.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.



i think i've been falsly accused of such by so many, that the mere act of me posting is seen by some as " being uncivil ", when there's no evidence what so ever to support that claim.


No sleep lost here.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 6:32 PM

SERGEANTX


Interesting stuff HK. Thanks for posting it.

Most of what he had to say seemed rather obvious, but I'm assuming the book gets into more subtle details.

The most important issue discussed, in my opinion, was the way Democrats allow Republicans to frame debate by establishing the terminology we use. This is incredibly powerful stuff and it makes me wonder whether anyone ever really read Orwell.

What I find slightly ironic is that, from my recollection, it was the Democrats (more accurately, social liberals in general) who pioneered such flimflammery. They've been pushing various social change agendas for years based on efforts to manipulate the language we use. It was really the genesis of the whole PC phenomenon.

But when the Republicans mastered the very same tactics and used it against them, Democrats were blindsided. I think they've become so steeped in such shenanigans that they don't even see it for what it is. Maybe the problem is that all the time they were doing it, the Dems thought of it as legitimate discourse. That's why they don't even consider resisting such tactics when used against them. To them, it's the way politics is done.

This is why I consider so incredibly important to resist such efforts - from either 'side'. When they call the terrorism problem a "War", it means something. If we don't agree with what it means, we're fools to propagate such language.

And this is where our press has utterly failed us. They've become willing accomplices in the game, dutifully parroting whatever newspeak is pumped out of the political machine. It even seems they are the source of much of it.

The most exciting thing about this sort of book is that it seems that at least some people are beginning to wake up. We're going to have to fight these tactics at very fundamental, philosophical levels if we're to defeat them. We have to unmask these kinds of language games and expose the manipulations they represent.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 6:40 PM

HKCAVALIER


Let me break it down for you, AUR. In my first post I said:
Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
...Cenk Uygur becomes little more than a nuisance when interviewing a first-rate mind. So, you know, just try to tune him out as best you can and listen to Lakoff.


Basic reading comprehension tells you that I consider Lakoff to be a "first-rate mind." Then without any explanation or substantiation you opine:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.


I can't make it any clearer than that and I won't. I have nothing more to say on the matter of your incivility. Feel free to have the last word because I won't be replying to you again unless you choose to actually discuss the interview I posted.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 22, 2008 6:42 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Sarge spikes the ball here, a large part of the problem is that it's like tryin to argue religion with someone who keeps changing what the terms MEAN - and by use of deliberately vague terminology that one side takes to mean one thing, yet another to the other, and perhaps nothing at all to an observer, or even something else, it's all just buzzword flinging and meaningless in the end unless the terms being used are specific in meaning and agreed upon by all sides.

Basically this would require an application of Hoyles law to be subverted.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 8:17 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:
The most important issue discussed, in my opinion, was the way Democrats allow Republicans to frame debate by establishing the terminology we use. This is incredibly powerful stuff and it makes me wonder whether anyone ever really read Orwell.

What I find slightly ironic is that, from my recollection, it was the Democrats (more accurately, social liberals in general) who pioneered such flimflammery. They've been pushing various social change agendas for years based on efforts to manipulate the language we use. It was really the genesis of the whole PC phenomenon.


I think you're missing something here, Sarge. The original purpose of using "politically correct" language was to avoid the kind of framing the Right has now wholeheartedly embraced. Before "PC" became this childish mass-hysteria to avoid being "bad," it was an attempt to use language neutrally and inclusively. "Chairman," f'rinstance, frames power as belonging properly to men. It is the unavoidable meta-message of that word. So the word "chairperson" was created to avoid that meta-message. So even "PC," though it can surely be used for demogogic purposes, is itself a disempowered form of language, designed to remove rather than impose meta-messages. Of course, that's not really possible, so "PC" has acquired a mountain of meta-messages of its own. But at it's core, the concept has only negative value and is therefore psychologically avoidant, fear based. So, yeah, "PC" is effed up, but not in the same way the Right has been selling its ideas to America for over 30 years.
Quote:

But when the Republicans mastered the very same tactics and used it against them, Democrats were blindsided. I think they've become so steeped in such shenanigans that they don't even see it for what it is.

The point Lakoff is making is that Democrats still think they're dealing with a one to one correspondence between words and reality. They think words describe reality when, really, words frame and refract reality. That's why they're blindsided.

Seriously, look at our own board. Rue and Signy (just to name two of our most dedicated and consistently liberal posters of facts and documents) have been laying out the facts for us for years. They embody this liberal idea that if you just lay out the facts clearly enough, people will employ their reason and come to the appropriate conclusions based on the facts.

But the conservatives have all the while implied that the Rues and the Signys of the world simply "spin" the facts to suit their agenda. And liberals react, predictably, with indignation at the implication that they are not being honest. Again, the liberal mindset believes in the one to one relationship between words and reality. So when the Right comes back with the "spin" argument, the liberals see it as an attack on their integrity, when really it's a frame that denies even the possibility of the objective and neutral language which the liberals employ. See what I mean?
Quote:

Maybe the problem is that all the time they were doing it, the Dems thought of it as legitimate discourse. That's why they don't even consider resisting such tactics when used against them. To them, it's the way politics is done.

And I would say that they still cannot recognize the framing as really happening at all, because it undermines their rationalist theory of human psychology. And that's why, when they do finally get the point of the Right's Orwellian manipulations, they so often collapse into cynicism and depression.
Quote:

This is why I consider so incredibly important to resist such efforts - from either 'side'. When they call the terrorism problem a "War", it means something. If we don't agree with what it means, we're fools to propagate such language.

One of the difficulties people have with holding onto their principles as you suggest here, Sarge, is that it really forces 'em to recognized how marginalized they are. That's tough for a lot of people. I certainly don't believe in this "War on Terror" any more than you do, but you and I are speaking from the margins. From a political standpoint, our voices are definitively disempowered. The brave walk alone.
Quote:

The most exciting thing about this sort of book is that it seems that at least some people are beginning to wake up. We're going to have to fight these tactics at very fundamental, philosophical levels if we're to defeat them. We have to unmask these kinds of language games and expose the manipulations they represent.
Hear, hear!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:04 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I think you're missing something here, Sarge. The original purpose of using "politically correct" language was to avoid the kind of framing the Right has now wholeheartedly embraced. Before "PC" became this childish mass-hysteria to avoid being "bad," it was an attempt to use language neutrally and inclusively. "Chairman," f'rinstance, frames power as belonging properly to men. It is the unavoidable meta-message of that word. So the word "chairperson" was created to avoid that meta-message...



I began thinking along these lines shortly after posting this. But I think there's a subtle difference going on. Before these deliberate efforts to 'correct' our language, such terminology wasn't an orchestrated effort to maintain social injustice - it was merely a reflection of our cultural assumptions and biases.

I think it was liberal hubris to assume that we could change such biases effectively by manipulating our language. Moreover, such efforts are dangerous because, as we've seen, tools to manipulate society are value neutral. The liberals of the 70's may have had the best intentions, but their tricks have now been used against them and that's where I see the irony.

The changes that were sought with the misguided efforts at "newspeak" should be pursued. I just don't think that "hacking" the language is the way to do it. Language follows culture. Trying to reverse that seems to be causing problems.

I can't help but think of one of the implicit assumptions in "Star Trek", where all officers are called "Sir" regardless of sex. The assumption is that (in ST's future history) the meaning of the word changed to become gender-neutral as a result of changes in society - not as the trigger for the changes. Granted, it's sci-fi, but I think it reflects a deeper truth. Real changes in society will change the meanings of the words. I'm not sure it can work the other way around in any lasting way.

Quote:

The point Lakoff is making is that Democrats still think they're dealing with a one to one correspondence between words and reality. They think words describe reality when, really, words frame and refract reality. That's why they're blindsided.

Seriously, look at our own board. Rue and Signy (just to name two of our most dedicated and consistently liberal posters of facts and documents) have been laying out the facts for us for years. They embody this liberal idea that if you just lay out the facts clearly enough, people will employ their reason and come to the appropriate conclusions based on the facts...
See what I mean?



I think I do, but maybe not. Because I don't see this habit as being confined to one 'side' or the other. Most all of us do it to some extent. It's why ninety percent of what goes on here (and most everywhere else political discussion happens) is people talking past each other. We lay out facts that we're sure lead undeniably to our favored narratives, and are astonished when others 'twist' the meaning to fit their own assumptions.

Quote:

From a political standpoint, our voices are definitively disempowered. The brave walk alone.


Is that it? I always figured it was my B.O.


SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, June 26, 2008 1:32 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


George ' rhymes with whack-off ' Lakoff



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:18 - 2071 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:16 - 6 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL