how could I think of metaphors as procedural knowledge instead of semantic? what if the creation of novel metaphors in the brain is an implicit function? with Music improvisation, there is a stepwise change that is within whatever the genre of the musician is. so if someone has internalized the rules of Bach, they can improvise Bach until the cows come home what if metaphor acquisition is improvisation of conceptual information? it’s a creative act, yet it is also rule following in that it takes several salient properties of one concept to act as a bridge connecting to another concept but not completely. or, from another view, they overlap in a match mismatch fashion in a significant enough way that the match mismatch had enough of a match to create a third concept which contains the shared subset of properties but it does not get its own existence (it remains unnamed and difficult to explain because it is implicit and not explicit knowledge) that is, procedural.

how could I think of metaphors as procedural knowledge instead of semantic?

what if the creation of novel metaphors in the brain is an implicit function?

with Music improvisation, there is a stepwise change that is within whatever the genre of the musician is.

so if someone has internalized the rules of Bach, they can improvise Bach until the cows come home

what if metaphor acquisition is improvisation of conceptual information? it’s a creative act, yet it is also rule following in that it takes several salient properties of one concept to act as a bridge connecting to another concept but not completely. or, from another view, they overlap in a match mismatch fashion in a significant enough way that the match mismatch had enough of a match to create a third concept which contains the shared subset of properties but it does not get its own existence (it remains unnamed and difficult to explain because it is implicit and not explicit knowledge)

that is, procedural.

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]