reading note

zll2204

Reading Note 5
Reader: 邹乐琳
Reading Time: 3h
Reading Task:  Metaphor, Truth and Action, Truth, The Myths of Objectivism and Subjectivism, The Myth of Objectivism in Western Philosohy and Linguistics, How Metaphors Reveals the Limitations of the Myth of Objectivism, Some Inadequacies of the Myth of Subjectivism, The Experientialist Alternative: Giving New Meaning to the Old Myth, Understanding
Summary of the Content:
These chapters argues that truth is not absolute but relative to human understanding, which is shaped by categorization rooted in interactional (not inherent) properties and experiential dimensions. Categories are fluid, defined by prototypes and contextual adjustments, meaning a statement’s truth depends on which properties are emphasized (e.g., “Light consists of waves” highlights wavelike traits, obscuring particle-like ones). This challenges rigid definitions, emphasizing that concepts are dynamic and context-dependent.
The objectivist view—which frames human-environment relations as mastery —contrasts with the experientialist perspective, which sees truth as contingent on how well a statement aligns with a specific situation’s needs. Different conceptual systems  can yield divergent truths and criteria for reality. Metaphors, far from being mere linguistic flourishes, are termed “imaginative rationality,” uniting reason  and imagination. They structure our understanding, making ordinary rationality inherently creative and flexible.
However, the empiricist tradition fears metaphor for its perceived subjectivity, viewing it as a threat to objective truth. The text critiques this, arguing that metaphor is essential for communication and rapport, especially when bridging unshared experiences. The “metaphorical chameleon” concept underscores the necessity of shifting between inconsistent metaphors to navigate complex realities, avoiding the oversimplification of rigid frameworks. This applies to science as well: acknowledging that theories highlight some aspects while hiding others could make scientific practice more responsible.
The “CONDUIT” metaphor, which treats words as vessels for objective meaning, is warned against for fostering misunderstandings and persecution when language is divorced from context.
Self-understanding requires continuous negotiation of metaphors, particularly in therapy, where uncovering unconscious frameworks reshapes personal narratives. Rituals preserve cultural metaphors and values, reinforcing how shared symbolic systems ground collective experience.
Ultimately, the text asserts that metaphors are not passive tools but active, shaping how we perceive reality, interact with others, and construct meaning—a process that is both deeply human and endlessly adaptable.
Evaluation:
Language Style:

The text employs a formal, academic tone with precise, technical terminology. It uses structured, logical phrasing to explain abstract concepts, often pairing theoretical claims with concrete examples.
Theme:
The central theme is the relativity of truth and the role of metaphor in shaping human understanding. It challenges rigid, objectivist views of knowledge  by arguing that truth is contingent on context, categorization, and interactional properties. The text emphasizes that metaphors are not just linguistic tools but foundational to rationality and perception, enabling us to navigate ambiguity and construct coherent realities. It also critiques the empiricist fear of metaphor, framing it as a dismissal of imagination’s role in human cognition. A recurring subtheme is the tension between stability and flexibility: while consistent metaphorical systems provide comfort and coherence, real-world functioning demands shifting between incompatible frameworks.
Thought:
These chapters build a case for experientialism—the idea that truth emerges from interaction with the world rather than abstract, universal principles. Truth is not absolute but depends on which properties are highlighted by a given conceptual system.
Metaphors unify reason and imagination, allowing us to structure experiences and infer meaning. The text redefines “rationality” as a creative, adaptive process rather than a purely logical one.
The text advocates for responsible knowledge production, acknowledging that even scientific theories are partial and context-bound.
Reflection:
The idea that truth is not an absolute but a product of human categorization and metaphorical framing challenges deeply ingrained assumptions about objectivity. For instance, I used to think of scientific statements like “Light consists of waves” as definitive facts, but the text reframes them as partial truths—highlighting specific properties while obscuring others. This realization feels both liberating and humbling. It underscores the limitations of any single perspective and invites a more fluid, context-sensitive approach to knowledge.
The concept of metaphor as “imaginative rationality” struck me as particularly powerful. I’ve long viewed reason and imagination as separate domains, but the text reveals how they are inextricably linked.
What stands out most is the ethical dimension of metaphor. If metaphors shape not only how we understand the world but also how we act within it, then choosing them responsibly becomes a moral task. The text’s warning about the dangers of decontextualized language—like the Conduit metaphor fostering misunderstanding or persecution—feels urgent in today’s polarized climate. I’m left wondering: How can I become more aware of the metaphors I live by? How might adopting new ones open up possibilities for empathy, creativity, or social change?
Ultimately, this text has taught me to see metaphor not as a poetic device but as a lens through which we filter reality. It’s a reminder that our maps of the world are not the territory itself—that truth is a collaborative, evolving construction. Embracing this perspective doesn’t mean abandoning coherence, but rather recognizing that coherence is a choice, shaped by the metaphors we consciously or unconsciously adopt. And in that recognition lies both freedom and responsibility.