>I don't know how to save the usefulness of metaphor and analogy in >our
>thinking (but I believe we must not abandon this method -- it may >even be
>necessary to allow us to think new things at all!) while >preventing the
>subsequent abuse and distortion.
In describing quantities we use numbers and this assures a common language
and therefore understanding. But in describing our perception of reality
or, most of the cases, the images built in our minds (not coming from a
reallity that did happened) we use words.
Now comes the interesting part because words are more like a currency
which always has a value but the exchange rate is moving all the time.
At a bottom level words are metaphors of the images that are describing,
so my conclusion is that we are using metaphors all the time and is not a
question of abandon it because is the only chance we have to communicate
consciously.
If you are speaking about the metaphor as describing a more complex image
(the common sense of the word), I might ask who says that "learning
organization" is a more complex image than leader (word used very often
and not commonly considered as a metaphor) or than learning, or
organization, or structure,...etc
Since we will continue all our life to use words, instead of worring about
the simplicity or complexity of the words to be used we'd better care
about the exchange rate of them with the local currency of the
participants of disscusion, and this you can only find after many
quotations and deals done effectively.
As you notice I myself used a metaphor coming from Dealing Rooms (perhaps
because it's part of my job) but I hoped that you might have the minimum
data of that process allowing you to understand easily, and also I was
trying to use a rare metaphor which is not too crowded with different
senses.
Thank you for making me think about it,
Demostene Iva
--"Demostene ?!" <demostene_@hotmail.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>