This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
It'd be nice if there were articles on cognitive linguistics and/or conceptual metaphor
Lakoff's own descriptive/proscriptive distinction, esp. RE Rawls (p 37) (p. 21)
(One or both of these claims about Jane Jacobs may be blatantly false. Could the author of the original Jane Jacobs observations correct this?)
Jane Jacobs, in her 'Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerece and Politics, shows how identical policies are rationalized in different ways for audiences of different interest groups. Lakoff's model helps explain why this might be an effective strategy. Lakoff also claims that, as of the date of writing, conservatives had much better stradegies for providing a palatable rationalization for their constrituents than did liberals, which was to explain some of their successes.
Jane Jacobs, in her 'Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerece and Politics, discusses how conservative politicians exploit "the logos", or male fascination with beauty, violence, and moral certainty, in order to gain power.
...
self-righteousness: p. 59
fairness: p 60
In sum, the "central problems" seem like a bunch of really stupid questions with really obvious answers. One gets the feeling that the author should have done a bit more research before writing the book. Kevin Baas talk 19:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the "central problems" summary does a very good job of explaining the basis of the ideas of the book. It reads to me like a conservative biased (in Lakoff's definition) interpretation of the ideas, which explains why it made such a nice straw man for Kevin_Baas to slay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.139.173 ( talk) 00:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
It'd be nice if there were articles on cognitive linguistics and/or conceptual metaphor
Lakoff's own descriptive/proscriptive distinction, esp. RE Rawls (p 37) (p. 21)
(One or both of these claims about Jane Jacobs may be blatantly false. Could the author of the original Jane Jacobs observations correct this?)
Jane Jacobs, in her 'Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerece and Politics, shows how identical policies are rationalized in different ways for audiences of different interest groups. Lakoff's model helps explain why this might be an effective strategy. Lakoff also claims that, as of the date of writing, conservatives had much better stradegies for providing a palatable rationalization for their constrituents than did liberals, which was to explain some of their successes.
Jane Jacobs, in her 'Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerece and Politics, discusses how conservative politicians exploit "the logos", or male fascination with beauty, violence, and moral certainty, in order to gain power.
...
self-righteousness: p. 59
fairness: p 60
In sum, the "central problems" seem like a bunch of really stupid questions with really obvious answers. One gets the feeling that the author should have done a bit more research before writing the book. Kevin Baas talk 19:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the "central problems" summary does a very good job of explaining the basis of the ideas of the book. It reads to me like a conservative biased (in Lakoff's definition) interpretation of the ideas, which explains why it made such a nice straw man for Kevin_Baas to slay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.139.173 ( talk) 00:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)