|
|
|
About This Book
ISBN13: 9780374158286 |
Powells.com Staff Pick
Building from his background in cognitive science and the conservative and liberal family metaphors that he explored in Moral Politics and Don't Think Like an Elephant, George Lakoff demonstrates in his new book the ways the political Right is seizing and changing the definition of "freedom" in America — and explains what progressives should be doing about it. Whose Freedom? The Battle over America's Most Important Idea is a thorough, hopeful, and practical read.
Recommended by Tessa, Powells.com
Review-a-Day (What is Review-a-Day?)
"There is much to admire in Lakoff's work in linguistics, but Whose Freedom?, and more generally his thinking about politics, is a train wreck. Though it contains messianic claims about everything from epistemology to political tactics, the book has no footnotes or references (just a generic reading list), and cites no studies from political science or economics, and barely mentions linguistics....And Lakoff's cartoonish depiction of progressives as saintly sophisticates and conservatives as evil morons fails on both intellectual and tactical grounds." Steven Pinker, The New Republic (read the entire New Republic review)
(Read George Lakoff's reponse to Steven Pinker's review, reprinted here with the kind permission of the New Republic Online)
Synopses & Reviews
Publisher Comments:
Review:
Book News Annotation:
Review:
Review:
Review:
About the Author
What Our Readers Are Saying
Add a comment for a chance to win!
Average customer rating based on 8 comments:









-
mikemykel, October 20, 2006 (view all comments by mikemykel)
If I were to be sentenced to life in solitary confinement
Philosophy in the Flesh would be the book I would most like to take with me. I have been carrying it around and rereading it for several years. The last book of Pinker's I read was Blank Slate and in fact it will probably be the last book of Pinker's that I read. I haven't read Whose Freedom yet but I am saving my nickles and dimes.

-
judgeschreber, October 20, 2006 (view all comments by judgeschreber)
I think this debate is incredibly petty and embarrassing--it really shows academics at their worst. Lakoff, in my opinion, should never have tried to move into writing about politics, since, as Pinker rightly points out, any former intellectual rigor he observed previously is thrown out the window in order to make ideological points about a field he is no expert in. In this respect he could have taken a lesson from Chomsky--these are two different worlds with different standards of what passes for rigor, and if you're going to step into this other world, make sure you engage with it on its own terms with plenty of concrete examples and an abundance of footnotes. On the other hand, as Lakoff points out, Pinker's attack results from a poor, caricatured understanding of Lakoff's cognitive linguistics.
I much admire Lakoff's early work that effectively demonstrates the mistake in thinking (ala Chomsky) that syntax is independent of semantics (even staunch supporters of Chomsky such as Ray Jackendoff have come around to the position that meaning does in fact matter for language). I like Lakoff's work on metaphor, but my support has somewhat softened, and I now feel, with Pinker, that although metaphor is important, Lakoff does take it a bit overboard.
On the other hand, I find Pinker's evolutionary psychology utterly irresponsible. I agree with Lakoff that it is in many ways a throwback to social darwinism. It is meant to "shock" by confronting many admittedly irrational positions deriving from the attractive power of "the blank slate," yet it refutes these positions by making equally irrational appeals to the attractive power of darwinism.
Not that evolutionary theory and linguistics/psychology cannot mix well, when applied responsibly and rigorously. Many people are doing great things with an evolutionary approach to mind, including some of my personal favorites: philosopher Daniel Dennett at Tufts; the AI people at MIT who were influenced by Marvin MInsky's "Society of Mind" (in case you've seen it, one of those MIT guys is profiled in Errol Morris' film "Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control," and he provides a good, rough account of this evolutionary model of cognition); and my new favorite thinker about linguistics and cognition, Michael Tomasello, a researcher on chimpanzee and human infant intelligence who, in his book "The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition," has a very intriguing argument about the attribution of intention to other beings as a crucial step in the evolution of the human mind.
Anyways, that's my take on the whole thing.

-
MuddyMo, October 19, 2006 (view all comments by MuddyMo)
I am commenting on TrollHaven's comments on Pinker's attack on Lakoff.
TrollHaven wrote: "Republicans really do stand for something--something despicable, but they do stand for it"
That's one for the ages.
View all 8 comments
Product Details
- ISBN:
- 9780374158286
- Subtitle:
- The Battle over America's Most Important Idea
- Author:
- Author:
- Publisher:
- Farrar, Straus and Giroux
- Subject:
- General
- Subject:
- Conservatism
- Subject:
- Liberty
- Subject:
- Political Freedom & Security - General
- Subject:
- General Political Science
- Subject:
- Government - U.S. Government
- Subject:
- Political Ideologies - Conservatism & Liberalism
- Copyright:
- 2006
- Publication Date:
- June 2006
- Binding:
- HC
- Language:
- English
- Pages:
- 288
- Dimensions:
- 8.50x6.02x.97 in. .98 lbs.










