Poetry and literature originate historically from religious talk, which first evolved as a way to appropriate by prevarication what cannot be assimilated by thought and action. Narratival frames and rhetorical discourse markers seep into our doings and sayings, against our vigilance, compromising their effectiveness, precisely because their religiomystical persuasive powers derive from our deep biological and cognitive heritage. Just as the ancients were inclined to attribute agency to one Zeus so that other deities could be deprived of theirs, humans are inclined to attribute priority to some arbitrarily privileged features of discourse to temper the complexity of the rest of their cognitive and practical commitments. Of course, this is not always a problem: most of the things we say and do are materially inconsequential, in that they dont influence others adversely. But not all doings and sayings are so conveniently inert. Doings and sayings have consequences for beliefs about what can further be said and done. And, so also, for what can really be said and done. The social scientist funding his theory of bureaucracy on metaphors, for instance, is liable to cost the government money if his contributions are taken seriously. The high-grain literary lies of humanities scholars, if allowed a role in political debates, can only obfuscate the interpretation of facts on which the fate of a political decision turns. Eventually, to loosely paraphrase Mark Wilson (2006) , our semantic pigeons return to roost and we must clear the metaphorical droppings if we value literal cognitive and practical hygiene. #DownWithRhetoric, #WalkTheTalk, #TalkShitGetHit
Posted on: Sat, 08 Nov 2014 13:12:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015