Showing posts with label logic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label logic. Show all posts

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Brilliant

More than two decades ago, I read Mark Johnson and George Lakoff's book Metaphors We Live By. It knocked my socks off with its brilliance. "Yes," I thought. "Our language reveals the metaphors that shape/control our thinking. I'd never thought about it like that, but he's so right!"

I thought that same thing this morning when I read this article Lakoff wrote: "What Conservatives Really Want." In it, Lakoff lays out all the moves that conservatives make in the public sphere - including shaping/controlling the language ("80% of the talking heads on TV are conservative," Lakoff reminds us - he could make the same claim about "talk radio").

By listing all the moves conservatives make, he reveals that the controlling metaphor of conservatives' worldview is the autocratic "strict father": they want the world to be structured like a head-of-household family where the strict father makes all the decisions, is not questioned, metes out the [necessarily physical] discipline.

With this kind of family, the social contract that Democracy promises (that we-the-people have a social responsibility to our fellow citizens) becomes a threat: helping others in the wider culture undermines the authority of the strict father.

Lakoff articulates SO clearly the views I've had for at least two decades but haven't been able to formulate, other than to say we're living through the last desperate gasps of the Patriarchy. To me, no one talks about the masculine violence that's behind all the criminal activity, economic greed, and gun-toting fear we see around us.

Conservatives campaign on the slogan "Take our country/state back!" (Minnesota's recent Republican candidate for governor used this phrase, even though our state had been suffering under a Republican governor for eight years. No logic there, but "strict fathers" don't work with logic; they work with fear). Back to where, is of course the question. Turning out country back in time seems to be the conservatives' goal - when men were men, women knew their place, and Dad yelling "Get off my lawn!" and following that up with a few firings of a 410 shotgun are appropriate ways to act.

Change is automatically a threat to the "strict father." And our speeded-up, technologically enhanced pace of change scares these fathers (who can also be "Mama Grizzlies"), but "strict fathers" cannot show that they're scared. So they scare everyone else instead. And then use the threat of physical violence against everyone else.

Back to Lakoff: he sees the Wisconsin protests as a hopeful sign of real citizens who want to make the world a better place (real public servants such as teachers, pipe fitters, fire fighters, rather than the fake "public servants" that politicians claim to be, in another theft of a good metaphor). I applaud his article and want to share it far and wide.

Read it and pass on his clear thinking.


Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Logical contradiction

I am SO TIRED of the crap spewed by the political leadership in our state: the current state education commissioner Alice Seagren (who has a degree in marketing, not education) is speaking on MPR right now, and she chastizes teachers and students for not being able to do what they need to do, such as meet standards or evaluating sources.

Yet she does not examine her own logical contradictions: in one breath she says that "students need more time on task" because it will improve students' "performance" in some way, presumably on tests. In the next breath she says that Minnesota has one of the "shortest" school years in the country. Her logic is that Minnesota has to lengthen the school year because other states have longer school years.

HOWEVER, here's the logical flaw: Minnesota is at the TOP of the national rankings in terms of education (on many, many measures, including number of students who graduate from high school, test scores, etc.) So if we're at the top but we have fewer class days than other states, why would students need more time on task?

There's not a positive correlation (or maybe there's a negative correlation!) not to mention causal relationship between the length of the school year and the educational achievement of students as measured against other states.

One big caveat: in some national rankings, Minnesota has *slipped* during the Pawlenty administration. For example, in 2005-06 MN was listed as #6 on the "Smartest State" ranking by Morgan Quitno. By 2006-07, we slipped to #13! So perhaps we can see that the policies by our current conservative, education-punishing administration are really condemning our state's educational system to a lowest-common-denominator: yuck.

On a related political note: this website correlates state's educational rankings with the "blue/red" characterization. Although the website doesn't say when these rankings were made, it *is* curious that the highest educational rankings correlate with blue/Democratic states. Hmmm.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Logical Fallacies, again

I'm always challenged when I teach logic in a composition course. It's not strict mathematical syllogism that the philosophers study/teach; it's the rhetorical syllogism Aristotle lays out for his students -- he calls this the "enthymeme."

I'm thinking of that kind of rhetorical reasoning as I read an article entitled "The Fine Line Between Clever and Stupid," which points out faulty causality. The writer is a smart blogger, Kathy G. of "The G Spot: Politics, Economics, Feminism, Labor, Culture, Ideas." She's responding to a Wall Street Journal article called "Vote Republican if You Want Equal Pay." The writer of that article "looked at Census data on women's pay relative to men's in every presidential administration from LBJ to the present. And lo and behold, he found that women's relative pay increased far more under Republican presidents than Democrat ones."

The cause? Well, you'll have to look at the article yourself, but let's just say that more than one thing can cause a statistic to rise (pay increases can show up in one group because another group's pay *decreases*). Kathy G. rightly points out that men's falling salaries during Republican presidents can make women's salaries appear to rise.

Uh huh. I like smart women.

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Need a class discussion?

Then watch this video:

"The Story of Stuff" is a 20-minute video argument that needs to be seen by everyone!

It's great for many, many reasons. For one thing, it'll explain to you why our government wants to send some citizens/taxpayers an "economic stimulus" check of a few hundred dollars but doesn't want to contribute an equal amount to things like education, health care, transportation infrastructure, etc. It'll also help understand something behind the partisan wrangling about the economic stimulus package.

Watch it until the end, too, to see ways to act.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Considering logic

In this political season (aren't they all?), we're bombarded with arguments by analogy. Most of these arguments contain the logical fallacy called a "weak [or false, faulty, questionable] analogy." It takes work to uncover the weak analogy, but perhaps this little story (stolen from here) will provide a bit of fun:

Consider: How is a raven like a writing desk? (In other words, how are these two analogous?) Most people might say they're not; they share no compelling characteristics.

Consider this answer: Poe wrote on both of them.

It's a joke, right? We know it's a weak analogy because the answer depends upon wordplay, the two meanings of "on" used simultaneously. (The ancient Greeks called this particular figure of speech or trope a "syllepsis.")

In other words: study logic and rhetoric today so you can become a better argument analyzer. Visit these sites:
Silva Rhetoricae
Gorgias's Weblog: "The Daily Trope"
CriticalThinking.org
Language Log
Electric Rhetoric