Metaphors are often used to help us grasp complex concepts, like the inner workings of the mind or the intricacies of illness. We liken the mind to a “machine,” or sometimes even a “computer,” to make sense of its functions and malfunctions. But herein lies the issue: our minds are not mechanistic entities that can be “repaired” by a technician. By employing these metaphors, we risk oversimplifying the complexities involved, thereby failing to address them adequately.
Susan Sontag’s work, “Illness as Metaphor,” pushes us to question our metaphorical framing of illnesses. Metaphors shape not only our understanding but also our treatment and perception of those affected. Think of the moral undertones that come with terms like “fighting” an illness. It implies that if you’re not “winning,” you’re not fighting hard enough. A damaging perspective, especially when applied to mental health.
While metaphors might aid in exploring convoluted subjects like science, politics, and even AI, they can be severely limiting in others. I can’t help but think about how metaphors contribute to the moralization of illnesses. If someone is “broken,” are they less valuable? Are they to be discarded or fixed? These are ethical questions that metaphors, unintentionally or not, bring into the conversation.
It’s essential to remember that metaphors are not universally applicable. They can be especially perilous in the realm of health and illness, where misunderstanding can have dire consequences. I think it’s high time we consider revising our metaphorical language to better reflect the complexity and nuance of human health. Otherwise, we inadvertently contribute to the stigmatization and misunderstanding of these conditions, something that can only impede progress.
Let’s be critical of the language we use, understanding that it shapes our reality and can either hinder or facilitate empathy and progress.
Read more at: Episode #178 - Transcript — Philosophize This!
You may also be interested in: Visible tracking illness and not health