I Never Metaphor I Didn't Like (2nd December 2009)

I see metaphors everywhere. If only there were a way to document the ones that make a heck of a lot of sense so we can use them for further application and allow them to spread into the culture of today's world. I mean, why is it that it is so difficult and tedious to infiltrate the dictionary and books of phrases nowadays? Everyone's become so much smarter and creation is such a regular event now, people ought to have a way or a forum to put their shit out there in a way that makes it official, you know?

I say if you have something note or quote worthy to share, the world needs to give you credit for it. There's always so much fuss over who came up with what and all that jazz. Wait, let me stop here. Who came up with "all that jazz"? I'm going to look it up. Hold on.
---
Ok so it's inconclusive. I did some light research (I say "light" because I only looked at the first couple of hits I could find and there are numerous "theories" and most are plausible. I gave up soon after, since I decided this digression has lost its point.)
OR HAS IT?

I am a compulsive looker-upper. A pretty girl not long ago started calling me "GoSee" as a result of all my endeavours for truth, or something like it. And I'm sure there are more people out there like me... Some not as twisted, but most with the same intentions.
And curiosity.

And with this train of thought, I submit to you a metaphor I thunk up earlier this week - "The Theatre Seat Compromise"

This is an analogy for that wonderful disequilibrium in a movie hall or any theatre where your hand is usually allowed only one arm to rest on. Why? Because the other arm is occupied by another gentleman or (gentle) lady's hand and this phenomenon exists across the entire row. It's a perfect example of a compromise that is conducive for all parties to accept it as fair and favourable.
Win-win? I'd like to think so. I am a firm believer of win-win. It's like my favourite sport.

It reminds me of A Beautiful Mind, the movie about a Mr. John Nash and his delirious experience with university, love and intellectual society; complete with spies and everything. So anyway, he comes up with this delightful theory at a bar to maximise his group's scoring-with-women chances. This theory later graduates to become the Nash Equilibrium.

See, in any competitive game your outcome is usually one winner and one loser. His idea is to change that dynamic and maybe create a possibility for each party to win. Personally, I am not a big fan of competition myself. I mean, I am all for working hard to improve my game and obviously this is relative to others but heck, as long as I'm having fun, everything else falls by the wayside. And you can have fun losing too. Not to say that losing is a favourable outcome, but I am suggesting a perspective shift so that everyone wins, so to speak.
This is not unusual, and it certainly isn't something new to society. (While I write this, I'm imagining a basketball game - but I'm sure you can see how it applies to day to day things.)

Apparently it's called a non-zero-sum game, where "some outcomes have net results greater or less than zero. Informally, in non-zero-sum games, a gain by one player does not necessarily correspond with a loss by another."
"Stated simply, Amy and Bill are in Nash equilibrium if Amy is making the best decision she can, taking into account Bill's decision, and Bill is making the best decision he can, taking into account Amy's decision. Likewise, a group of players is in Nash equilibrium if each one is making the best decision that he or she can, taking into account the decisions of the others." (Wikipedia)

So why is it so hard to come by? Why must everyone work so hard to defend their so called "honour" and "pride" when all we're really doing is kidding ourselves.
There is pride in the process.

Ok I'm trying to focus but I'm at the office and there's other people here (employees and such) who are asking me all sorts of questions and in turn, being awfully distracting! Pshhh, the nerve!
*puts hands on hips*

Later!

P.S: http://plus.maths.org/issue47/features/rey/index.html

No comments:

Post a Comment