Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Ghasem Khabbazian ¹
• Seyed Mohammad Mahdi Etemadoleslami ²

¹ Department of Science and Technology Studies., Faculty of Management, Science and Technology. Amirkabir University of Technology. Tehran. Iran

² Department of Science and Technology Studies. Faculty of Management, Science and Technology. Amirkabir University of Technology. Tehran. Iran.

Abstract

In descriptive terms, metaphors are widely used in scientific discourse, including scientific explanations. However, the fact that metaphorical explanations are justified explanations needs to be analyzed. According to the dominant approach, a justified scientific explanation must be both understanding-enhancing and true. The fundamental challenge regarding the truth of metaphorical explanations is that metaphorical propositions are considered false because they do not correspond to reality, while scientific explanations are expected to be true. In this study, we first show how metaphorical explanations enhance understanding using Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of conceptual metaphors. Then, we argue how, in addition to understanding-enhancing, metaphorical explanations can be accepted as true according to this theory. The latter argument relies on the fact that understanding takes primacy over truth and often relies on metaphor. Finally, we attempt to refine and strengthen the position of the truth of metaphorical explanations through four paths that we have called argument from dead metaphors, argument from partial versus complete correspondence, argument from epistemic cost, and argument from curve fitting.

Keywords

• Conceptual metaphors theory
• Lakoff and Johnson
• Scientific explanation
• Understanding
• Truth