George Lakoff: Frames, Metaphors & Politics

Often referred to as the "father of framing," Professor George Lakoff is a renowned cognitive linguist whose work has contributed to a new understanding of the ways that conceptual frames and metaphors shape our social and political lives.
Nathalia Ramos (Berggruen Institute) and Max Henning (USC Brain & Creativity Institute) spoke with Professor Lakoff to get his take on the strategies that both Democrats and Republicans are using to frame this election and, beyond that, how developing new frames is key to reviving civil discourse in this country and building a flourishing & sustainable future.
*Clarification: This interview was recorded last week (Oct 20, 2020), and in the discussion the speakers are referring to the Town Hall debates which held on Oct 15 in separate locations.

[@briantodd854]

It was fun listening to Lakoff talk about being a student of John Nash and hearing Ramos and Henning’s reaction!

[@aidando5047]

I just discovered framing. It's great to have a word for this, as I didn't notice it before and now I can. This was a great talk. Really interesting the stuff on zero-sum frames.

[@raycosmic9019]

Trump has the empathy of a warrior. Biden has the empathy of a parent. Frame = context = perspective

[@beverlyperry389]

I haven't recognized any type of empathy in Trump.

[@siniel8362]

beauty is not only a product of wealth, but a commodity within and of itself. In other words, it is no longer the search for wealth to find beauty but the search for beauty to find status. now beauty can give the illusion of wealth Do you agree of this?

[@ihorperec4990]

Conservatives in the United States have been very successful in using catchphrases, aphorisms, euphemisms, deceptive metaphors, and propaganda clichés against liberals. Liberals, unfortunately, lag behind conservatives in this regard. For example, conservatives call liberals "leftists" and "socialists", even though liberalism and socialism are completely different concepts. This is done to corrupt the very concept of liberalism by tying it to such phenomena as Stalinism, the USSR, the Gulag, North Korea, etc. Liberal values are sometimes referred to by conservatives as "San Francisco values". By this conservatives allude to many social problems in the city (e.g. homelessness) and to the fact that San Francisco is one of the LGBT centers in the country. That is, conservatives seek to convince the average person that liberal values lead to poverty, homelessness, and LGBT "omnipotence". During the fight against marriage equality, conservatives used the phrase "defense of marriage", when in fact they were fighting a type of marriage. This hypocrisy is very typical of conservatives. The estate tax or inheritance tax was dubbed by conservatives "the death tax", to create in the mind of the average person an image of soulless government officials taking money away from a grieving family. Although the taxes collected by the state are primarily for the benefit of the average citizen. To create distrust of the liberal media, conservatives invented the phrase "liberal media elite", which gives the false impression that all media is controlled by liberals and that poor conservatives are not given a say. The use of adjectives is interesting. The phrase "staunch conservative" is used in relation to stallwart conservatives, but in relation to stallwart liberals the phrase "knee-jerk liberal" is used to imply that the liberal worldview is supposedly a set of rash, instinctive reactions to the outside world. (The word knee-jerk means a person's automatic reaction to a medical mallet hitting his knee joint.) There is the phrase "limousine liberals", coined by conservatives to portray liberals as a small, wealthy elite detached from the people who do not understand the needs of the common people. On the whole, though, American conservatives are richer than liberals and even less aware of the needs of the common folks. As the saying goes, look who is talking.... The silly myth of God's creation of the world was called "creationism" by conservatives, as if it were a scientific field worthy of in-depth study. Years later, when people realized that this was nonsense, they replaced the term with "intelligent design" and even invented a new theory pretending to be scientific. In a similar way, conservatives updated the phrase "political correctness", instead of which they now use the word "woke" (although it was originally used in progressive circles in the African-American community and meant heightened sensitivity to injustice, oppression, racism, etc.) But conservatives, of course, use the word woke as a mockery of liberals. Conservative media more often refer to the wealthy rich as "hardworking taxpayers". They call the fetus in the mother's body "unborn baby" to give the impression that abortion is the murder of a human being. When conservative judges make radical decisions, it is considered normal and natural, but when liberal judges do it, they label them "activist judges," insinuating that they are allegedly acting contrary to the constitution and against fundamental principles of law enforcement. In short, the ideological struggle between conservatives and liberals is also taking place in the linguistic sphere, where, unfortunately, the advantage is clearly on the side of the former.

[@berry22_]

Thank you so much! Your comment has been useful for my research paper!

[@smspirate]

read up Lakoff on moral cognitivism. it's why liberals push the virtue stuff from an empathetic frame. No matter your position on their methods and objectives, its manipulation and since Dr. Lakoff worked with political liberals about framing, it's been non-stop manipulation ever since. The frame for the conservatives is utterly the truth/trust and the moral-cognitive process that precedes the decision about actionable art/metaphors. Libs are about interactionist constructivisms that express individuality placed in the center of their society. Conservatives, as noted by Lakoff here, believe in the empathy of a democratic society which accommodates individuals by creating art/labor experiences they can participate in and be a part of. That is how society fulfills its purpose of survival, no matter the other frames. Basically liberal arts right now produce nothing but objects which is what art was pre-Marxist. And it makes me laugh daily how their Marxist view of oppressor struggles kills their resource committments, and engagement thresholds, inviting dictatorial takeover and propaganda enforced edicts, just like its always and repeatedly done. Every new crop of it's my turn youth seem to never know this, and think they're going to make the world more loving kumbaya ... my how moral we've become. again.

[@scorpioblueeyes7388]

I agree with the other reply to your comment. This has helped me understand the framing issue in politics better than the video itself.

[@deadman746]

I wish Lakoff didn't so misunderstand Nietzsche. The concept of empathy (but *not* pity) and love as _power_ is essential to understanding him.

[@newtalking3]

What’s all this “we” and them? I thought this was academic ? It seems biased

[@deadman746]

This is political. Lakoff makes no bones about his biases, which is honest. There is some more academic stuff on KZbin, but I wish there were more.