Metaphor and Knowledge

Ken Baake

Description

Metaphor and Knowledge offers a sweeping history of rhetoric and metaphor in science, delving into questions about how language constitutes knowledge. Weaving together insights from a group of scientists at the Santa Fe Institute as they shape the new interdisciplinary field of complexity science, Ken Baake shows the difficulty of writing science when word meanings are unsettled, and he analyzes the power of metaphor in science.

FOREWORD

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

1. INTRODUCTION: THE PROBLEM WITH "RULES" AND WHY WORDS WILL NOT SIT STILL

Harmonics: Using Music Theory to Explain How Metaphor Works in Science
Structure of the Book
What Is the Santa Fe Institute?

2. A TECHNICAL WRITER AT THE THINK TANK

Establishing Ethos With an "Initial Impressions" Report
A Technical Writer's Balancing Act: Capture the Excitement of Research, but Avoid Hype
Writing for the Institute's Bulletin: What Happens When Technical Writers Cannot Find Their Bearings Toward an Audience

3. METAPHOR: CONSTITUTING OR DECORATING THEORY IN SCIENCE

Rhetoric at the SFI: A Qualified Acceptance
The Meaning of Metaphor
Metaphors in Motion: How They Work
Metaphor and Science
Fear of Persuasion and Metaphoric Harmonics
Rhetorical Alternatives to Metaphor in Science

4. METAPHORS AND MATHEMATICS: A SHARED TRADITION OF CONSTITUTING KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENCE

The Metaphors of Information as the New Materiality
Representing Reality
Platonic Arguments for the Supremacy of Mathematics
Metaphor for Understanding a Non-Algorithmic World
Making Sloppy Ideas Rigorous
No Rational Method of Having Good Ideas
SFI Metaphors as Theory Constitutive or Literary? A Tale of Two Terms1
Metaphor Harmonics: Who Intends the Bee to Be Yellow?
Metaphor Harmonics: Emergence, the Brain, and Neural Networks
Equilibrium and the Prisoner's Dilemma

5. SCIENCE WRITERS LOOKING FOR THEIR AUDIENCE

Style and Eloquence in SFI Writing
A Matter of Invention: Writing for Scientists and the General Public
Incommensurability: Trying to Cross Disciplines

6. "COMPLEXITY": AN ETYMOLOGY LEADING TO A DISCUSSION OF WHETHER IT IS A METAPHOR OR SOMETHING ELSE

The Word "Complex" in the Oxford English Dictionary
"Complexity" Arrives in Santa Fe
The New "Complexity" Returns to Old Haunts
Is "Complexity" a Metaphor?

7. MANAGING METAPHOR HARMONICS AND OTHER CHALLENGES OF MAKING KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENCE

Speak Carefully and Carry a Paradigm Shift

WORKS CITED

INDEX

Sujets

• Discourse analysis
• Stylistics
• Semantics
• Mathematics
• Science

Informations

• Publié par: State University of New York Press
• Date de parution: 01 février 2012
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780791486740
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 2 Mo

Extrait

METAPHOR AND KNOWLEDGE

SUNY series, Studies in Scientific and Technical Communication James P. Zappen, editor

METAPHOR AND KNOWLEDGE

The Challenges of Writing Science

Ken Baake

State University of New York Press

Published by State University of New York Press, Albany

© 2003 State University of New York

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.

For information, address State University of New York Press, 90 State Street, Suite 700, Albany, NY 12207

Production by Judith Block Marketing by Jennifer Giovani

Library of Congress CataloginginPublication Data Baake, Ken Metaphor and knowledge : the challenges of writing science / Ken Baake. p. cm. — (SUNY series, Studies in scientific and technical communication) ISBN 0–7914–5743–5 (alk. paper) — ISBN 0–7914–5744–3 (ppk. : alk. paper) 1. Technical writing. I. Title. II. Series

T11 .B23 2003 808´.0666—dc 21

2002030479

FOREWORD

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Contents

vii

ix

1. INTRODUCTION: THE PROBLEM WITH “RULES” AND WHY WORDS WILL NOT SIT STILL1 Harmonics: Using Music Theory to Explain How Metaphor Works in Science 7 Structure of the Book 13 What Is the Santa Fe Institute? 18

2. A TECHNICAL WRITER AT THE THINK TANK Establishing Ethos With an “Initial Impressions” Report A Technical Writer’s Balancing Act: Capture the Excitement of Research, but Avoid Hype Writing for the Institute’sBulletin: What Happens When Technical Writers Cannot Find Their Bearings Toward an Audience

3. METAPHOR: CONSTITUTING OR DECORATING THEORY IN SCIENCE Rhetoric at the SFI: A Qualified Acceptance The Meaning of Metaphor Metaphors in Motion: How They Work Metaphor and Science Fear of Persuasion and Metaphoric Harmonics Rhetorical Alternatives to Metaphor in Science

v

25 27

31

36

43 53 55 62 68 72 76

vi

Contents

4. METAPHORS AND MATHEMATICS: A SHARED TRADITION OF CONSTITUTING KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENCE79 The Metaphors of Information as the New Materiality 82 Representing Reality 85 Platonic Arguments for the Supremacy of Mathematics 89 Metaphor for Understanding a Non-Algorithmic World 93 Making Sloppy Ideas Rigorous 99 No Rational Method of Having Good Ideas 107 SFI Metaphors as Theory Constitutive or Literary? A Tale of Two Terms 111 Metaphor Harmonics: Who Intends the Bee to Be Yellow? 120 Metaphor Harmonics: Emergence, the Brain, and Neural Networks 133 Equilibrium and the Prisoner’s Dilemma 138

5. SCIENCE WRITERS LOOKING FOR THEIR AUDIENCE

Style and Eloquence in SFI Writing A Matter of Invention: Writing for Scientists and the General Public Incommensurability: Trying to Cross Disciplines

6. “COMPLEXITY”: AN ETYMOLOGY LEADING TO A DISCUSSION OF WHETHER IT IS A METAPHOR OR SOMETHING ELSE

The Word “Complex” in theOxford English Dictionary “Complexity” Arrives in Santa Fe The New “Complexity” Returns to Old Haunts Is “Complexity” a Metaphor?

149 152

160 172

179 181 191 197 200

7. MANAGING METAPHOR HARMONICS AND OTHER CHALLENGES OF MAKING KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENCE207 Speak Carefully and Carry a Paradigm Shift 209

WORKS CITED INDEX

223 235

Foreword

en Baake has produced groundbreak- K ing work in the rhetoric of science with his study of meaning construction at the Santa Fe Institute, (SFI) a think tank specializing in complexity theory, computer simulation of complex societies, and various approaches to the modeling of physical and biological systems. His work should be of interest to those who study the rhetoric of science and to those technical communicators who help scientists with their writing. There are other audiences who will find interest in his rich discussions of the practice of science. Philosophers or linguists who care about how language works through metaphor are another likely audience. Those who work in the more theoretical areas of scientific practice will benefit from thinking about the interaction of language, theory, and scientific work. Those rhetori- cians interested in applied theory will find much to stimulate their thought, since the work is so carefully grounded in Classical and con- temporary rhetoric, drawing strains from semantics to develop a theory of harmonics. Baake is particularly interested in how metaphors come to have currency, what their status is for both insiders and outsiders to the com- munity of scientists, and whether metaphors might more appropriately be considered stylistic or meaning constitutive. His approach combines ethnographic, participant-observer data gathering with close analysis of texts from the Institute. Interviews with a number of scientists and oth- ers associated with the Institute lend texture to his analysis, as do his various assumed personae at the Institute as a reporter, web author, and commenting observer. Baake’s work demonstrates strong command over several literatures, including the language and rhetoric of science, metaphor as treated within philosophy, and the emerging disciplines of chaos theory and modeling of complex systems. One of Baake’s primary contributions comes from the light he sheds on the relationship of verbal to mathematical thought and expres-

vii

viii

Foreword

sion. He nicely explores the preference for mathematical modeling, but demonstrates how his subject scientists recognize the limits of mathemat- ics, both for codifying their own ideas and expressing those ideas to their fellow scientists and interested people from outside the Institute. He explores their deliberate and cautious regard for metaphor, and uncovers a range of opinion toward the use of metaphor. Baake develops a theory of harmonics, his own metaphor borrowed from the field of musical compo- sition, to discuss the ways that metaphors gather meanings about them- selves and become larger, more encompassing, and sometimes resonant with too many meanings to be useful as conceptual, theory-generating tools. He rightly characterizes metaphors as containing a range of mean- ings, with overtones creating dissonance that will be perceived as more or less tolerable, depending on the scientist’s awareness, the positioning of that scientist with regard to contemporary competing theories, and appreciation of the range and robustness of the metaphor. In a brilliant chapter on the term and constructcomplexity, Baake draws a tight focus on this single term and rehearses its life his- tory across various discourses, showing how it gathers and loses its power to create and sustain insight. The chapter is enlivened by Baake’s access to key thinkers on complexity, and by their own insights into the ways a special word takes on new meanings. The debate, here and throughout the book, centers on whether a term such as “complexity” can indeed be considered a metaphor, and if so, what distinguishes it from other, more formal metaphors, such as those with clearly distinguishable tenor and vehicle. Baake’s engaging presentation renders this work a treat to read. His years as a journalist are complemented by his work in business and eco- nomics. Baake is able to write in ways that engage and carry the reader on a highly enjoyable excursion. His prose is smooth and progressive; his arguments are well cast and a delight to follow. The text is populated with the voices and perspectives of his subjects, always presenting them as thoughtful and complex, even when they take diametrically opposed positions. Throughout the work, Baake shows respect for his subjects and a deep curiosity about their intellectual lives as well as the everyday work of science. When the science (or philosophy or rhetoric) gets difficult, Baake writes in ways that are especially inclusive, welcoming the reader into new territory with reassuring explanations and careful exposition.

Stephen A. Bernhardt Andrew B. Kirkpatrick Chair in Writing and Professor of English University of Delaware, June 5, 2002

Acknowledgments

ince the underlying theme of this book is that S knowledge is developed socially, it should not be surprising that its author feels tremendous gratitude to many people who have helped shape the project. I have been working on this project since 1997 when it grew out of a science journalism and technical writ- ing internship at the Santa Fe Institute. Five years later, with the help of scores of friends and colleagues, the project is now complete. I offer thanks first to members of the Institute, who accepted yet another ethnographic study of their site and who took time to reflect deeply on the questions I was asking. Without this reflection, I would not have gained the insights presented here. I offer a special acknowledgment to Ginger Richardson, SFI program director, for her continued support during my association with the Institute. Her dry sense of humor, reflec- tive nature, and ability to make things happen made it all possible. This work evolved out of doctoral studies in the Rhetoric and Professional Communication program at New Mexico State University. As dissertation chair, Stephen Bernhardt shepherded the text through with thoughtful comments and enthusiasm. Steve set the dissertation on the course to become a book by nominating it for an award at the Conference on College Composition and Communication. I could not have completed the research without the firm grounding in rhetorical theory offered by David Fleming, Chris Burnham, and Stuart Brown who taught me that Plato’s method of tackling philosophical challenges through problem-posing and focused dialogue still speaks to a postmod- ern world. Carl Herndl’s thorough instruction on qualitative research gave me the confidence to take such an approach here. Tim Roth and Elba Brown-Collier at the University of Texas, El Paso opened my eyes to the ways that economists approach problems of knowledge. As I began converting the project to a book, I received lots of sup- port from colleagues and students in the English Department at Texas Tech University. Carolyn Rude made my entry into the ranks of assis-

ix