|
|
Post by Conina on Feb 18, 2006 10:17:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by estara on Feb 18, 2006 15:29:27 GMT -5
we're studying this sort of thing in the class I'm taking (called Awareness). What that article calls "dream state" one of the book we've calls "frames". People have frames for understanding the world, some of deep seated and cultural, others are created by language. Frames are triggered by images and language. Example: if you tell people "Don't think of an elephant!" they always will, because the word elephant triggers the mental image/idea of a large, grey, wrinkly animal with large flappy ears, long tusks, and a very weird looking nose.
An even more complex example is to say "tax relief". What does this mean, and what ideas does it conjure? Well, the word "relief" implies an affliction, and when that affliction is removed, the remover becomes the hero. Putting "tax" in the phrase implies that taxes are an affliction, that they should be removed, the person that removes them is a hero, and anyone that opposes their removal is a bad person. But is this the true nature of taxes? A more pertinent way to think about taxes would be to question wether you were getting your money's worth. That is, for the taxes you pay, is the infrastructure of your society well maintained, are their people to respond to emergencies, is the younger generation educated well enough to become responsible citizens? In other words, taxes are an investment. You and future generations reap the benefits of investing in infrastructure and people now and in the future. It would be wiser to ask if your investment is put to good use, than to ask, am I afflicted with taxes?
The problem with that article is that it tends to use inflammatory language, which gives the reader the impression that the writer is nuts. It invokes the wrong kind of frames and tries to force them upon the reader, when the reader "knows" very well that everything they're saying is bull-poopy. It would have been far more effective if the writer had toned down his language and discussed the actions of the powerful while invoking frames that would not totally conflict with current frames, just adjust them a lil'.
Everything about the frames is from George Lakoff's book, "Don't think of an Elephant". Lil' heavy on the politics, but good for thinking about how language is used.
|
|
|
|
Post by Conina on Feb 18, 2006 17:31:06 GMT -5
I am very impressed with your comment Estara.
For the record:
I am fascinated with the subject itself but do not care for the writer's attempt to appeal to the reader's emotions rather than intellect.
I've always been a person prone to reacting without thought in certain situations, many times to my own downfall. One time, years ago, i was talking with a friend about an incident that happened where i found myself ashamed for the way i reacted. He said,
"the fact remains that u can not control reactions, but u can however control your actions." That statement made me aware of something i needed to change and i set about to do just that. It was like waking up.
I am always amazed to see that people are more easily moved by emotional triggers. Advertisement is the best example of this. My 68 year old mother in law (she's great btw) is a very intellegent woman. She is a retired nurse. At one point in her career she was head nurse of the emergency room in one of our hospitals where i live. She suffers from chronic pain and a couple of years ago had a mild stroke. If Sonic (or any fast food joint) advertises a new product on tv, within 24 hours of her seeing the commercial, she will tell me she wants one of those (usually cant remember the name or place) and then begins to try to describe to me what she's referring to. Usually i've seen the commercial and already am waiting for this to occur so i say " u mean this at that place". She says yes and i go get it lol.
A better example: I work for a security alarm company. We install and monitor burglar and fire alarms. Its a locally owned company that has been established for 35 years and yet never advertised itself. In the last 2 years the company has started a marketing campaign in this area and of course has come up with a mascot so to speak. Its a little burglar head. We call it Luigi. To me this is not a good symbol for an alarm company. It does not appeal to me intellectually and i think it conveys the wrong message. I am in the minority here. That stupid little symbol has gotten our company name out there and this business has tripled in the last 2 yrs. People love luigi. When asking new customers what attracted u to our company, 7 out of 10 times they saw luigi on one of our salemens' cars or techs' trucks. Anyway to reiterate, i find it all so fascinating.
|
|
|
|
Post by tempus on Feb 19, 2006 8:10:13 GMT -5
Conina, people are idiots and don't think. The article you linked to, and some of the others are the site are trying to appeal to emotions I'd agree. And that's because they realize that people are idiots and they are trying to sway them the easiest way they can. Ahh isn't the intricacies of language...
-t
|
|
|
|
Post by Conina on Feb 19, 2006 9:21:04 GMT -5
 rofl. true there tempus
|
|
Kaifu1
Soldier
Playing Dragoon is like playing FFXI on Hard Modeplg%%Old School%%[Xb0:Aifuu]
Posts: 1,102
|
Post by Kaifu1 on Feb 23, 2006 9:31:22 GMT -5
zomg down with the US! ... naw... I'm not that stupid. I stopped reading it after a few pages. I don't like mixing my "intellect" with politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Conina on Feb 25, 2006 12:19:47 GMT -5
zomg down with the US! ... naw... I'm not that stupid. I stopped reading it after a few pages. I don't like mixing my "intellect" with politics. rofl |
|
rofl. true there tempus
