Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T06:54:10.567Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

This Is Not a Universe: Metaphor, Language, and Representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Liliane Papin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Positivist science has been marked by its reliance on an objective, transparent, and purely descriptive language, an approach that modern philosophers of science have questioned and rejected. With the advent of the theory of relativity, followed by the theoretical framework of quantum physics, many physicists themselves have been led to wrestle with the traditional concept of representation and language. They have joined poets and literary critics in questioning the definition and function of metaphor. Echoing Magritte's famous “This is not a pipe,” David Bohm and David Peat suggest “this is not a universe” as an inscription to be borne in mind for each new scientific hypothesis. Scientific metaphors as well as literary metaphors need to be recognized, unity and difference unfolded. This exploration of “metaphorical play” might help define fields of interpretation and true interdisciplinary convergence, which is only a broadening of metaphorical activity.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 107 , Issue 5 , October 1992 , pp. 1253 - 1265
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Arbib, Michael A., and Mary B. Hesse. The Construction of Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Max. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohm, David, and Peat, David. Science, Order, and Creativity. New York: Bantam, 1987.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels. Atomic Theory and Human Knowledge. New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar
Bohr, Niels. Quantum d'action et noyaux atomiques. Actualites scientifiques et industrielles 807. Paris: Hermann, 1939.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: U of California P, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capek, Milic. The Philosophical Impact of Contemporary Physics. Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1961.Google Scholar
Capra, Fritjof. The Tao of Physics. New York: Bantam, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capra, Fritjof. The Turning Point. New York: Bantam, 1982.Google Scholar
Culler, Jonathan. On Deconstruction and Criticism after Structuralism. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1982.Google Scholar
Culler, Jonathan. The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1981.Google Scholar
Edie, James. Speaking and Meaning: The Phenomenology of Language. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1976.Google Scholar
Elkana, Yehuda. “The Historical Roots of Modern Physics.” Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”: History of Twentieth Century Physics. Ed C. Weiner. New York: North Holland, 1983.Google Scholar
Esslin, Martin. The Theater of the Absurd. New York: Doubleday, 1969.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. Ceci n'est pas une pipe. Illus. by René Magritte. Paris: Fata Morgana, 1973.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Valerie D. Transgressive Readings. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gribbin, John. In Search of Schrodinger's Cat. New York: Bantam, 1986.Google Scholar
Hayles, N. Katherine. “Chaos as Orderly Disorder: Shifting Ground in Contemporary Literature and Science.” New Literary History 20 (1989): 305–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heisenberg, Werner. Across the Frontiers. New York: Harper, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and Beyond. New York: Harper, 1971.Google Scholar
Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and Philosophy. New York: Harper, 1958.Google Scholar
Heisenberg, Werner, et al. On Modern Physics. New York: Potter, 1961.Google Scholar
Hesse, Mary. Revolutions and Reconstruction in the Philosophy of Science. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Holton, Gerald. The Advancement of Science and Its Borders. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Jeans, James. The Mysterious Universe. New York: Macmillan, 1930.Google Scholar
Jones, Roger S. Physics as Metaphor. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1990.Google Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. New York: Freeman, 1983.Google Scholar
Kline, Morris. Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd rev. ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1970.Google Scholar
Livingston, Paisley. “Literary Studies and the Sciences.” Modern Language Studies 20.4 (1990): 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magritte, Rene. The Treason of Images. Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Pitts, Mary Ellen. “The Holographic Paradigm: A New Model for the Study of Literature and Science.” Modern Language Studies 20.4 (1990): 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prigogine, Ilya, and Stengers, Isabelle. Order out of Chaos. New York: Bantam, 1984.Google Scholar
Revel, Jean-Francois, and Lemaire, Jean-Francois. “Sida: Le check-up de Luc Montagnier.” Le Point 10–16 June 1991: 52–56.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1979.Google Scholar
Von Neumann, John. The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Trans. Beyer, Robert T. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1955.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J., et al. Gravitation. San Francisco: Freeman, 1973.Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Whorf. Ed. Carroll, John B. Cambridge: MIT P, 1956.Google Scholar
Zukav, Gary. The Dancing Wu-Li Masters. New York: Bantam, 1979.Google Scholar