[MD] French ingredient in the soup of sentiments

[Arlo Bensinger]

Margaret/SA,

I think you are right on regarding the pervasive adoption of the "monetary" 
metaphor in our lives. I trace this back the publication of The Wealth of 
Nations, as a "Kulturbarer" of its time, in the transition from 
"aristocratic metaphor" to "mercantilistic metaphor". The adoption of the 
financial metaphor, as both the driving "force" of progress, and the 
re-evalution of humans as "resources" in the quest for wealth, had profound 
effects on social relations vis-a-vis the framing of the dialogue.

It was this, I'm convinced, that Pirsig is getting at when he says in ZMM, 
"And now he began to see for the first time the unbelievable magnitude of 
what man, when he gained power to understand and rule the world in terms of 
dialectic truths, had lost. He had built empires of scientific capability 
to manipulate the phenomena of nature into enormous manifestations of his 
own dreams of power and wealth...but for this he had exchanged an empire of 
understanding of equal magnitude: an understanding of what it is to be a 
part of the world, and not an enemy of it."

The role of "conceptual metaphor" in framing not only our perceptions but 
the way we interrelate (intra- and inter- relation) is well documented in 
the literature. For example, "argumentation as war" is a pervasive metaphor 
in typically Anglo-cultures. However, many Latino cultures frame 
"arguments" not was "war" but as "dance". So, while in English you'd say "I 
won that argument", or "When the argument got intense, I brought out the 
big guns", this would make no sense translated into other languages that do 
not use the "argument is war" metaphor. Typically, these cultural metaphors 
are "invisible", we adopt the referential usage without ever realizing the 
governing metaphor.

George Lakoff, one of my favorite authors, is represented in Wikipedia with 
this, "A less extreme, but similar, claim is made by George Lakoff in 
'Moral Politics'. Lakoff claims that the public political arena in America 
reflects a basic conceptual metaphor of 'the family.' Accordingly, people 
understand political leaders in terms of 'strict father' and 'nuturant 
parent' roles. Two basic views of political economy arise from this desire 
to see the nation-state act 'more like a father' or 'more like a mother'."

Another strong metaphor in our culture is "time". Pirsig address this in 
the Afterward to ZMM. "This book has a lot to say about Ancient Greek 
perspectives and their meaning but there is one perspective it misses. That 
is their view of time. They saw the future as something that came upon them 
from behind their backs with the past receding away before their eyes. When 
you think about it, that's a more accurate metaphor than our present one. 
Who really can face the future? All you can do is project from the past, 
even when the past shows that such projections are often wrong. And who 
really can forget the past? What else is there to know?"

In recent times, the mercantilistic dialogue has become even more 
pervasive, influencing such statements as "I have a lot invested in our 
relationship" (as you noted), and "This was a good way to spend my time" 
(can you "spend" time?). Money, as I've said here for quite some time, has 
become the dominant factor in Western Culture. Nothing is as important as 
"money". Profit is King. God is not dead, God has transmuted into Dollars.

Finally, you should also notice the "privatization metaphor" and its 
effects on our interactions with the world. Since the mercantilistic 
dialogue has taken hold, the movement has also been towards "private" and 
away from "public". Things must be "owned" to be "of value". Indeed, it is 
ownership that connotes value. Over the past several decades, we have (as a 
whole) increasingly moved from primarily engaging in "public spaces" to 
primarily engaging in "private spaces". Think about how many hours per day 
you spend in private space. We move from our private homes, to our private 
cars, drive to our private offices, eat in restaurants where privacy is the 
norm (ever been to a restaurant in other culture? you might find that 
third, unused chair suddenly being filled by a "stranger"), and we retreat 
to our private homes for the night. Even in typically public spaces we are 
demanding private activity. Taverns, for example, used to be areas of 
mostly public dialogue, now they are filled with dozens of "private dialogues".

Anyway, you are right to notice and be concerned about the 
capitalization-driven metaphors, and how they influence over time both our 
inter- and intra- conceptual frames. It drives the overconsumption, near 
pathological need we have to consume, and the dehumanization of everything 
from the workplace (people are nothing but resources) to our relationships. 
Its sad.

Arlo