chapter 3

恨如冰

This chapter explores how metaphors structure our understanding by emphasizing certain aspects of a concept while hiding others. A key example is the “ARGUMENT IS WAR” metaphor. When we describe arguments using terms like attacking a position or defending a point, we highlight the competitive, combative elements of arguments but overlook their cooperative or collaborative dimensions. This selective framing shapes how we perceive and engage in arguments, making conflict feel inherent to the process.

The chapter also introduces the “CONDUIT METAPHOR” for communication, where language is seen as a container for ideas. Phrases like “putting ideas into words” or “the meaning is right there in the sentence” imply that meaning exists independently of context. However, this metaphor hides the role of shared context and interpretation. For instance, a sentence like “Please sit in the apple juice seat” only makes sense if the listener knows the context (e.g., a breakfast table with one apple juice). This shows that meaning is not always “in the words” but often relies on situational cues.

Lakoff and Johnson argue that no metaphor is neutral. Each metaphor’s structure directs our attention to specific features while downplaying others. For example, viewing time as a resource (“saving time”) emphasizes productivity but ignores the subjective experience of time. Metaphors are thus partial tools—they simplify complex concepts but never fully capture them.