2. Anthropologists want examples v. The notion that argument can ever be translated as dance is logically wrong, because if we had a society with a word"x " that they used to mean dance, then when it was applied d translate it as is dance-like. We would never translate it as"argument Back to the example of arguments as war 1. Arguments are by nature confrontational 2. If there's nothing to win we call it a discussion or 3. We only call it an argument if there is something to w The Kuna will say, as they argue i. We give each other the way We admonish each other iii. We mutually give each other the way iv. We sit hearing cases v. We give each other our thought 1. But they will use all these nice phrases while nearly getting into fistfights g. The expressions have no determination and no influences over their actions h. The realm of action and the realm of communication are not tied nearly as closely as Lakoff and Johnson sugge The languages we use do have a tremendous importance in pushing us in certain directions, even if they are not forcing our actions i. Example: Wonderful article by Carol Cohn, works with nuclear strategizing during the Cold War 1. Studied arms strategist, but she had to start using their 2. She found that the more she used their jargon, the more she agreed with their points of view 3. By the end of her study she had to stop herself and try and g pull her assumption out from the language For example they didnt speak about bodies and blood and death, but about clean strikes and mutually assured destruction j. We need to move away from determinism, but still think about the that are played i. For example, Myerhof goes over how you put someone down or how you put yourself forward You can learn a lot from looking at the language2. Anthropologists want examples. v. The notion that argument can ever be translated as dance is logically wrong, because if we had a society with a word “x” that they used to mean dance, then when it was applied to a conversation, we’d translate it as meaning “a verbal exchange that is dance-like”. We would never translate it as “argument”. e. Back to the example of arguments as war. 1. Arguments are, by nature confrontational. 2. If there’s nothing to win we call it a discussion or a chat. 3. We only call it an argument if there is something to win. f. The Kuna will say, as they argue: i. We give each other the way ii. We admonish each other iii. We mutually give each other the way iv. We sit hearing cases v. We give each other our thoughts 1. But they will use all these nice phrases while nearly getting into fistfights. g. The expressions have no determination and no influences over their actions. h. The realm of action and the realm of communication are not tied nearly as closely as Lakoff and Johnson suggest. i. The languages we use do have a tremendous importance in pushing us in certain directions, even if they are not forcing our actions. i. Example: Wonderful article by Carol Cohn, works with nuclear strategizing during the Cold War. 1. Studied arms strategist, but she had to start using their language. 2. She found that the more she used their jargon, the more she agreed with their points of view. 3. By the end of her study she had to stop herself and try and pull her assumption out from the language. 4. For example they didn’t speak about bodies and blood and death, but about clean strikes and mutually assured destruction. j. We need to move away from determinism, but still think about the games that are played. i. For example, Myerhof goes over how you put someone down or how you put yourself forward. ii. You can learn a lot from looking at the language