George Lakoff on The Political Mind

Mr. Lakoff should read Thomas Sowell's book, "Black Rednecks and White Liberals."

He should also read "A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles."

You should read Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant."

Is that the one with the subtitle saying you can't use a 19th century brain to fix 21st century problems?

I plan to eventually read a couple of his books including that and "Moral Politics", but I doubt I'll be impresses. The material almost seems blatantly anti-intellectual. Trying wimp liberals to a "nurturing mother" and tough conservatives to a "stern father" doesn't exactly impress me. Breaking down why people see the world how they do is a little more deep.

For example -

Is a libertarian like Ron Paul a "stern father"? He's a pretty loose guy that opposes laws against drugs and prostitution.

Are mass murdering socialists like Mao, Hitler, and Stalin "nurturing mothers"? I doubt it.

The cons commenting here are displaying the right's aversion to science.

That would be an interesting topic of study for a historian. Has it always been this way, conservatives = anti science and scientific research?

Professor Lakoff has been a great help in giving meat to political dialogues and freeing people from the split brain of left vs. right thinking. The agenda should be on humane rights, on advocating for an protecting humane rights, not mere distractions!

This is an great clip, but his book is better because it's good notes linking to the science. "The Political Mind" is probably at your library

And yet, you offer no evidence. Read Lakoff's book and check out the science cited in its notes. It's solid science

Lakoff is old hat, and the "science" is based on naive assumptions.

And "wrong" in the sense of simple-minded and naive.

There is very little question most "individuals" are multiple personae.

But that is a different question.

Also he does not apply the same methodology to "moderate" as to left and right.

Define "moderate" as a construction of the political persona, for example, and his imagery, which is all it is, bites the dust.

Conservative and Libera are also constructs.

Let me say something about the 'science'.

1) Although Lakoff frequently refers to neurology, NONE of his research depends on the actual workings of neurons. It's based on comp. simulations that have only a remote similarity to those workings. 2) 99% of his research depends on circular linguistic evidence ("just look at the words") 3) Non-linguistic research only loosely supports his TIME IS SPACE-metaphor.

Cognitive scientists generally regard Lakoff's work as anything BUT scientific.