George Lakoff’s Expansive Lecture: How Linguistics Relates to Everything Else.

This talk by George Lakoff has got to be one of the most ambitious 40-minute talks I’ve ever watched. Lakoff is a linguist who has spent his life studying language, but not merely language. He has also drilled down into the brain using neuroscience, connecting our use of language to such things as neural binding and mirror neurons. He has also looked upward from conceptual metaphors to point out their personal and cultural ramifications.

Metaphors begin taking root in three-year old children based on physical activities. As adults, we employ these metaphors ever-so-easily in order to understand complex social phenomena such as romantic relationships, art, teaching and politics. Whenever we employ these metaphors (and we are always doing this) we are thinking with our bodies. Further, without these metaphors we would have an impoverished understanding of essentially everything that is important to us. If you don’t want to invest in the entire 40-minute talk, I would urge you to go to the 24-minute mark to hear Lakoff’s story how the explosion of research on conceptual metaphors began with a tearful graduate student’s comment, “I’ve got a metaphor problem with my boyfriend.” After hearing this story and watching the short audience participation segment where Lakoff connects up romantic love with the physical act of traveling, the field of conceptual metaphor will likely become vivid and compelling for you. Conceptual metaphors are invisible to most of us, but once you see how they work, you will see them everywhere.  You might even feel that you have new superpowers for seeing how people talk, think and attempt to persuade each other.

Lakoff is probably best known for his work on metaphors (with philosopher Mark Johnson), beginning (but by no means ending) with the book, “Metaphors We Live By.” I’ve written on the importance of metaphors in many other places, including here, here and here.  Conceptual metaphors are critical to my own profession, the legal profession. I’ve published my own analysis on the critical connection between metaphors and the legal doctrine of stare decisis here: "The Exaggerated Importance of Stare Decisis." 

Continue ReadingGeorge Lakoff’s Expansive Lecture: How Linguistics Relates to Everything Else.

Rule #1: Take Time to Say Hello to Strangers

Over the past couple of decades, I've become eager to say hello to people I don't know, but it wasn't always this way. I'm most definitely an introvert and it was easy to walk on by.  Through trial and error, though, I've learned that you have no idea who that person is, the one you are passing on the street. It might be a person with a fantastic story. For instance, when my kids were young, I often walked past a man at my kids' grade school, merely saying hello. It was months later that I learned that he was a Grammy Award winning jazz piano player who toured the world.

About 20 years ago, at a Christmastime event at the home of a neighbor of my former family-in-law my father-in-law asked me, "Erich, have you met James Watson yet?" I hadn't. That night, while most of the neighbors sang Christmas carols, I had the opportunity to discuss the double helix with the co-discoverer of DNA.

There's all kinds of interesting people all around you. Most of them don't send you any clues to their accomplishments, not until you say hello and strike up a conversation.  You will miss out on some of the best parts of life if you don't take the time to say hello to strangers.

Sixteen years ago, in April, 2004, I took the time to get to know a woman who walked her two dogs (Cara Mia and Bobinskion) up and down my street every day. The woman's name was Bisia and it turned out that she was a Polish Countess who had an unusual story, a heroic story based on her life in Poland during World War II. She was 85-years old when I sat down to interview her for the Flora Place neighborhood newsletter. At that time, Bisa was married to her 95 year old husband, Isham. They have both passed away since I interviewed with her. After I wrote up her story, I noticed that the local PBS station had produced a feature on her too. I've embedded that link below.

I wrote this 15 years ago and rediscovered it today. I'd like to once again share her story. I hope you enjoy this.

The Countess of Flora Place

Originally Published April, 2004

Each of us might not have ended up living on Flora Place.  Life offers many paths to many other places.  I, for instance, grew up in St. Louis County and learned of this beautiful street through friends. My personal path to becoming a Flora Place resident, then, was not surprising.

For others, though, the journey followed convoluted and precarious paths.  One such person is Bisia Reavis, who has lived with her husband Isham at 4122 Flora Place since 1958.  As one of the most prominent dog-walkers on the street, Bisia is virtually an institution.  Always ready with her kind smile and encouraging words, she is generally accompanied on her walks by Cara Mia (a Doberman) and Bobinski (“Bo,” a Poodle).

The current editor of this newsletter has decided to begin a series of articles highlighting the stories some of our many interesting neighbors. Bisia was kind enough to share her journey from Poland to Flora Place as the first article in this series.

Formerly known as Countess Elizbieta Krasicka, Bisia was the youngest of six children born in 1921 to Count August from Siecin Krasicki and Countess Isabella from Granow Wodzicka.  The family lived at the Castle at Lesko, in Poland (present day Ukraine) tucked along the Carpathian Mountains.  The sprawling estate stretched to the borders of both Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The bright red family coat of arms is the symbol of a lineage of nobility stretching back to 1540.  Bisia’s story involves many ancillary episodes.  Her Grandfather Stanislaw traveled to Mexico to serve as one of Maximillian’s officers in the 1860’s.   Her uncle, the Archbishop of Krakow, ordained Pope John-Paul II.

Bisia was 17 when war broke out in September, 1939. The Germans and Soviets quickly decided that the San River (which flowed through the family garden) would serve as their contentious line of demarcation.

Continue ReadingRule #1: Take Time to Say Hello to Strangers

The Political Left Cheers Law Enforcement Abuses in the Case of Michael Flynn

I'm wondering how many of us on the political left will be able to tamp down tribal instincts in order to see these disturbing facts for what they are. Matt Taibbi explains in an article titled "Democrats Have Abandoned Civil Liberties: The Blue Party’s Trump-era Embrace of Authoritarianism Isn’t Just Wrong, it’s a Fatal Political Mistake":

Warrantless surveillance, multiple illegal leaks of classified information, a false statements charge constructed on the razor’s edge of Miranda, and the use of never-produced, secret counterintelligence evidence in a domestic criminal proceeding – this is the “rule of law” we’re being asked to cheer.

. . . .

In the last four years the blue-friendly press has done a complete 180 on these issues, going from cheering Edward Snowden to lionizing the CIA, NSA, and FBI, and making on-air partners out of drone-and-surveillance all-stars like John Brennan, James Clapper, and Michael Hayden. There are now too many ex-spooks on CNN and MSNBC to count, while there isn’t a single regular contributor on any of the networks one could describe as antiwar.

Democrats clearly believe constituents will forgive them for abandoning constitutional principles, so long as the targets of official inquiry are figures like Flynn or Paul Manafort or Trump himself. In the process, they’ve raised a generation of followers whose contempt for civil liberties is now genuine-to-permanent.

If you are willing to dig deeper into the details (and I hope you are), spend some time with Glenn Greenwald's article and detailed video (1 hour 45 min long). The long title to Greenwald's article: "New Documents From the Sham Prosecution of Gen. Michael Flynn Also Reveal Broad Corruption in the Russiagate Investigations." The Surveillance State is running amok and those of all political stripes should be deeply disturbed. Neither Taibbi nor Greenwald expect typical members of the political left to have enough integrity to step out or their tribal costumes in order to see and appreciate these disturbing facts.  Greenwald's analysis of tribal blindness is spot on:

Because U.S. politics is now discussed far more as tests of tribal loyalty (“Whose side are you on?”) than actual ideological or even political beliefs (“Which policies do you favor or oppose?”), it is very difficult to persuade people to separate their personal or political views of Flynn (“Do you like him or not?”) from the question of whether the U.S. government abused its power in gravely dangerous ways to prosecute him.

Flynn is a right-wing, hawkish general whose views on the so-called war on terror are ones utterly anathema to my own beliefs. That does not make his prosecution justified. One’s views of Flynn personally or his politics (or those of the Trump administration generally) should have absolutely no bearing on one’s assessment of the justifiability of what the U.S. government did to him here — any more than one has to like the political views of the detainees at Guantanamo to find their treatment abusive and illegal, or any more than one has to agree with the views of people who are being censured in order to defend their right of free expression.

The ability to distinguish between ideological questions from evidentiaryquestions is vital for rational discourse to be possible, yet has been all but eliminated at the altar of tribal fealty. That is why evidentiary questions completely devoid of ideological belief — such as whether one found the Russiagate conspiracy theories supported by convincing evidence — have been treated not as evidentiary matters but as tribal ones: to be affiliated with the left (an ideological characterization), one must affirm belief in those conspiracy theories even if one does not find the evidence in support of them actually compelling. The conflation of ideological and evidentiary questions, and the substitution of substantive political debates with tests of tribal loyalty, are indescribably corrosive to our public discourse.

As a result, whether one is now deemed on the right or left has almost nothing to do with actual political beliefs about policy questions and everything to do with one’s willingness to serve the interests of one team or another. With the warped formula in place, U.S. politics has been depoliticized, stripped of any meaningful ideological debates in lieu of mindless team loyalty oaths on non-ideological questions.

Continue ReadingThe Political Left Cheers Law Enforcement Abuses in the Case of Michael Flynn

Psychics Failed to Predict the 2020 Pandemic

What if, on Dec 31, 2019 you interviewed the 100 most prominent self-described psychics, astrologers and fortune tellers and asked then to tell you what the biggest thing in the world would be over the next year. I suspect that none of them would have mentioned a pandemic. I haven't done the research, and I don't know who the best-known psychics are, but I do know that "Psychic Nikki" struck out.  None of these Vox writers got it right, probably because they are not professional psychics. Sylvia Brown is causing a stir among those fans who only look at the parts of the pandemic that she got right.  And I see that Psychic Rick Tobin made his predictions about the pandemic on March 24, 2020.

Continue ReadingPsychics Failed to Predict the 2020 Pandemic

What to Say When You Notice Someone Sneezing in the Age of COVID-19

The traditional response to noticing another person sneeze has never worked well for me. Why would I invoke the name of a deity in such a situation?

Even if a such deity actually existed, why would he/she/it/they care about someone sneezing? Path dependance explains a lot of things we do and the "God Bless You" people often say (often with a concerned look) is one of those many things we do merely because we've always done it that way. 

COVID-19 has made our concerns about sneezing much more legitimate. I noticed this yesterday while I was outside in my backyard (alone) eating pretzels. I had a mouthful of pretzel when I had a strong urge to sneeze came upon me. Maybe God made me do it. I didn't hold back, even with my mouth filled with mostly-chewed pretzel. It was a world class sneeze, I can proudly say, but it was also a science experiment. I watched as the pretzel particles sprayed several feet from me. If I were contagious, that would have been pretzels AND COVID-19 micro-particles and I assume that the virus would have sprayed even much farther than the pretzel dust. This was a visual reminder that it is good advice to sneeze into your elbow these days, if you can't hold back your sneeze while with others.

I've had long been puzzled about the traditional sneeze response ("God bless you"). A bit of research today showed me that the phrase might have first been uttered around 600 A.D. to try to protect people from the plague.  For many years, however, we've used that same expression when there was no fear of any plague.  

In modern pre-COVID times, however, the phrase has been an overly-quaint response to a perfectly natural and harmless bodily action, especially around allergy season. Sneezing is one of those fascinating complex series of coordinated actions that our bodies do (along with swallowing, vomiting, and orgasms) where our animal bodies seem to take on a life of their own for a short period, independent of our control once they reach the point of no return.

But what, exactly, is it that a God would supposedly do by "blessing" me following a sneeze? The obvious answer (it would seem) is to help me to stop sneezing in the future. Armed with this speculative conclusion a few years ago, I asked my nephew Dan whether he could help me with a new logical yet pretentious thing to say to a person who just sneezed. Dan had recently majored in Latin as well as computer science. His suggestion was to say: "Consiste sternuere!" He assured me that this phrase is Latin for "Stop sneezing!"  If you say this phrase with a stern face, carefully pronouncing each syllable, it might appear (to certain credulous people) that you are saying something useful and that you might even be wielding other-worldly powers.

If you are interested in joining me to help to make this new cutting edge expression viral, simply utter "Consiste sternuere!" instead of "God bless you." It is pronounced. ConSIStay stern-you-AIR-eh.

Thank you, Nephew Dan.

Continue ReadingWhat to Say When You Notice Someone Sneezing in the Age of COVID-19