CLASS 1 - 08/31/04 Dwinnell 1213 (by parking lot) Th 2:15 to 3:30pm Blackboard: http://blackboard.berkeley.edu signon.. three docs on frank luntz - main language guy for conservative right 1. two recent ch.s 2. set of overheads for presentations 3. tutorial - basic ideas in cognitive linguistics Moral Politics - Lakoff new book in 2-3 weeks offered first over amazon $8 credit: assignments - pick an issue and look at framing.. analysis paper: on election on some aspect of it 1992 - tuned into quayle's acceptance speach.. written by bill crystal -- issue was that sentences didn't make sense together arguement against progressive income tax: "why should the best people be punished" 1994 election - contract with America - categorization book.. couldn't understand category: conservative -they are against abortion and for owning guns -for flat tax, what does that have to do with strong defense, or being in favor of tort reform.. confused by the associations.. he had to opposite view on all of it.. didn't know association there either.. cogsci problem.. what is the conceptual system so that it's natural to have these positions? another ?: why were these people talking about family values non-stop.. started interviewing liberals and conservatives.. one thing became apparent.. each side considered the other to be irrational.. -- this is a sign of something in cogsci a lot: conceptual systems that are defined as rational.. things that count as contradictions for conservatives are not for liberals.. and vise versa -- observations are crutial differences in accounting for the data.. metaphor: nation as a family.. we all have founding fathers.. we send our "sons and daughters" to war.. "daughters of the american revolution" -- no one questions.. and people uses it.. ?: if you have two different concepts of nation.. do you have two different concepts of family.. what about teams, herds, any small social group which becomes the basis of a larger social group.. Ans: two versions of family.. strict father family.. and nurturing mother family.. conservatives and liberals.. Moral Politics describes it.. 140 pages a week for three weeks.. Lots of strict fathers at RNC In strict father family.. set of assumptions made.. (gave paper at linguistics conf.. two linguistics profs who are from christian coalition.. afterwards they took Lakoff aside.. gave him some corrections.. then said have you read the great book, by Dobson.. ? .. James Dobson.. is on three thoudsand radio stations, $200m year operation funded by small donations.. teaches people around the country how to raise their kids.. on TV on Fox.. so read his book: Dare to Discipline, at local christian bookstore.. model of child rearing) -- assumed as rule that the world is a dangerous place, and it's all a competition and you have to win, and that children are born bad.. want to do what feels good, so the strick father is there to protect from the dangerous world, provide in the competitive world, teach children to compete, but mom is too soft to accomplish this... -- how do you create a moral child? painful punishment.. the child must feel pain.. -- Dobson is more liberal... says there is no excuse for hitting a child below 15-18 months.. others start from birth.. called 'tough love' to create a moral being out of your child -- Theory: if a child is punished painfully for doing wrong, they will stop, and lead to internal moral discipline for the child.. if people are not discpilined, they will go to hell -- secondary effect.. same moral discpiline is also for discipline to become prosperous --- morality and prosperousness go hand in hand --- good children go hand in hand --- father is obeyed because he is moral and powerful, and power and morality fit together in this theory --- there is a view of god as the almighty.. form hierarchy.. power is linked to morality --- hierarchy: man above nature, adults above children, western above other parts of the world --- extentions of hierarchy: men over women, whites over non-whites, straights over gays, --- natural hierarchies: natural talent over non-natural, good people follow self interest over bad people... this answers the Dan Quayle speech.. where people who are best are punished by taxes.. that is the view of taxation in conservative system Dobson is very clear about the relationship between this system and capitalism.. socialism is for the undiscplined If everyone pursues profit.. then as Adam Smith says, everyone will be naturally be as successful as they can.. version in this model... if everyone pursues self interest, then by virtue of this system... all interests will improve... "I owe you one" "debt of.." Morality is about well being.. if everyone pursues self interest, all interest improves.. so moral to pursue self interest.. If you want to "do good" to help people, you are getting in the way of people helping themselves.. Socially, for conservative system, they are immoral.. because you are giving people things they haven't earned -- making them dependent, taking their discipline away.. leading them to become first moral beings.. and making them unable to take care of themselves.. -- don't want to pay taxes to take care of people because it's immmoral Foriegn policy: discipline, America is a moral authority.. it knows right from wrong.. "We have might because we're right" - McCain -- they go together... therefore america knows what's right.. america has to be soveriegnty.. so would a strick father ask? no, he tells.. -- metaphor in foriegn policy.. Strict Father Model..where there are types of persons in the world community where different nations embody roles like fathers and children.. fathers tell.. children obey.. if they don't IMF gives fiscal discipline.. -- it would be immoral to allow otherwise Two kinds of children: Ones who internalize: at 18 they are out and taking care of themselves.. and after that happens the strict father is not supposed to meddle.. has to do with government not meddling.. government is seen as meddling stict father who keeps on telling the adult children what to do after they are adults - Libertarians really focus.. Ones who Model for Progressives: in a progressive family, it's the nurturant parent model -- assumes both parents are equal -- assumes children are born good -- nurture, and raise your child to be a nurturer -- have to know what child needs, be responsible for kid and for yourself, must be strong, competent, empathetic -- raise child to be empathetic and responsible, and the strength to carry it out Nurturing parent family: -- if you empathize, you want to protect -- what forms of protection: social safety net, worker protection, health, child protection -- homeland security was not formerly apart of this -- want child to be fulfilled and happy.. -- if you are going to be a fulfilled and happy person, you want everyone to be this way as well -- want child to be fulfilled in life, so freedom is required -- no freedom if no opportunity -- no opportunity if no prosperity ---- so freedom, opportunity and prosperity fit together -- building community is required.. --- have to have community service --- cooperation required, trust and honesty --- all requires open communication Main values: emphathy, responsibility, fulfillment, freedom, prosperity, trust, honesty and open communication If you take any progressive program, it will be some combination of those values These models are largely unconscious, and people don't largely understand them, but they reside behind conservative generally have a model of non-permissive culture.. and thing progressives just let their children do what feels good.. -- think liberals don't have any moral views.. hense Kerry as a flip-flopper.. permissive and goes all over the place -- code word for someone who doesn't have a moral compus.. Lots of types of liberals and conservatives.. generated by the models.. Paper by David Brooks in last Sunday's NYTimes.. Right Wing apologist for NYT.. argues that Bush is a progressive conservative... setting you up for the compassionate conservative talk Tues night at RNC.. Some of communitities in conservative framework are around church, charities, Everyone has both models, actively or passively inside them.. and if they don't apply, they at least understand a model and put it into action in a small section of their lives Greatest determinate of your voting is how your parents voted... FRAMING: (he has a new book out, Don't think of an Elephant" which invokes a frame) If you negate a frame, you invoke the frame. "I am not a crook" -- invoked the framing of crook.. Lesson in politics: never talk about anything in the oppositions framing and language Tax Relief - has to be an affliction and then a reliever who is a hero, anyone who stops him is a bad guy Guillani: Saddam was a weapon of mass distruction.. McCain: this is a war for our freedom -- this is the framing they are setting up.. a failed nation-state.. governments that failed their own people.. don't have control over their own people.. Taliban was a failed govt.. let in terrorists.. Sadam was failed.. let in terrorists.. allows you to not worry about terrorists.. so it's a war against failed governments... What they were doing was setting up a frame.. all reasoning in frame.. word Iraq hardly every used.. people don't like Iraq so didn't mention, nor was oil, Osama not mentioned -- hasn't been captured.. Saudi Arabia not mentioned.. no other problems like deficit or jobs... most important thing.. we are at global war for our freedom.. requires a global leader, not a flip-flopper.. everything else was left out.. people accept the frames.. in commentaries.. no hard questions of framers and no mention of the issues that were left out... Notice how they said it.. McCain, the war hero.. vietnam, cold war; Guillani, behind him images of 9/11 flexibilty verse inflexibilty.. what flexible solutions are good.. why Kerry is flexible unity.. tried stubbornness.. hasn't stuck - only tried for a week Bush weak in strict father framework.. he has said he miscalculated... could talk about blunders.. make a list of Bush's blunders.. Framing by conservative thinktanks.. "healthy, clean and safe" is used for any environmental if you are progressive.. use these spots to attack because those are the weak spots.. so rename and make an issue of the name.. NYTimes two weeks or so ago.. The Conservative Brain.. Categorization: cogsci and lingistics -- handouts are short version of 600 page book Basics: classical view of categorization: defined by a list of properties: called necessary and sufficient conditions --if in it, it has it, if not, not in category --definition of defintion: definition is a list of properties.. list of necessary and sufficient conditions -- goes back to Aristotle Aristotle: had idea that the world is made up of categories.. every category has certain essential properties.. tree: substance, form (trunk, leaves), change (sprouts from seed, etc) Does this work: assumption.. categories are out there in the world -- a tree.. but that the concept of the category of a treeness is in the world.. and that words name categories.. ---in that category are all the individuals.. the apple tree How does classical categorization and classification in general show up in politics? Liberal, conservative, democrat, republican... these are not classical categories --is it the case that every member is just as good as any other member.. is this true in the arististalian view? are there birds that are more birdlike than others and some that are less birdlike? -- sparrows are normal birds and penguins are weird birds.. odd birds Classical study by Elenor Ratch? in Psych dept.. about categories.. dozen experiment types that all resulted in the same answers... sparrows were good and penguins weren't as good.. eagles were better than penguins but not as good as sparrows.. -- flash on screen.. "sparrow is a bird" T/F and measure time... -- so we do have a notion of birds that is better or worse, though we have boundaries, like bats are mammals.. Other kinds of questions: is a barstool a kind of chair? "kind of" "kind of" is a hedge.. it changes the category type.. a bit.. "a barstool is sort of a chair" -- hedges adjust category challenges.. "He's a conservative, but he's pro-choice.." Linguistics 105.. point of class is cogsci.. For this class, pointing out difference. Bean bag chairs? Quinessential chairs are office chairs.. not beanbag chairs.. Members of categories are not all equal. Hedges adjust category membership. Other notions of categorization: Aristotle says.. categories are in the world, as well as individual tables.. "socraties is a man .. all men are mortal.. therefore socraties is mortal.." -- man is a category, and mortal man is subcategory.. so if in category, then subcategry.. applies if true throughout category" --this is the traditional view of reason.. --physical human body has no bearing on the reasoning mind.. Vightenstein: the category of "game".. you can't come up with any one thing that is completely a game.. solitare, board games, tennnis, There are degrees of categories: Rich -- what is rich verses poor.. How rich is he? How poor is he? Rich names the category, poor says he's poor. Used car: what is that? will need work, can drive, but problematic Good used car: from little old lady, low miles and price Bad: lemon.. Use typical case to see what you expect to happen -- idea prototype.. use it to set a goal or standard... or purpose.. idea husband typical nightmare -- want to aviod.. What is standard.. what do you avoid.. what is to be avoided.. Elections have everything to do with this prototype.. Ideals have to do with purposeful activities.. categories that have to do with satisfying human purposes "Salient Exemplar" -- a well known example of a terrorist attack is 9/11 -- each prototype is used with a high probability case.. political conventions use these everywhere.. and in social stereotypes.. Categorization: the woman who can't do math is a normal case.. What is the difference between that and a typical case.. you can call people on the social stereotypes.. but the typical case.. used cars may not need that much work.. but you worry about the Salient Exemplar.. you can call people on the social stereotypes.. but new ones will be made... people use categories to make snap judgements.. so categories have a lot of structure... and stereotypes have a lot of evil.. as well as some good.. social stereotypes have more emotional values.... and functional stereotypes.. are more about purpose.. can change stereotypes by calling people on it over and over.. but harder to change purposeful stereotypes.. Why is this important for Politics? "tax and spend liberal" How do you categorize Kerry? Flipflopper? This is branding... Categories are not differentiated.. something can be both typical and stereotypical.. not mututally exclusive.. Is there a typical liberal? Create the category.. Radial Category.. central member with variation members... So clear progressives and variants.. pick out the central members.. so have a simple case: MOTHER -- mother is defined as the birth frame.. person who gives birth.. nurturant.. who raised kids.. wife and mother.. genetic mother.. Categories defined by central members that do not have all the properties.