BIBLIOGRAPHY
The root metaphor theory of the basis of metaphysical
thinking was developed by S. C. Pepper in his World
Hypotheses (Berkeley, 1942) and later exemplified by a
deliberately chosen new root metaphor in his Concept and
Quality (La Salle, Ill., 1967). A somewhat similar theory
was developed independently by Dorothy Emmet in The
Nature of Metaphysical Thinking (London, 1945), extending
the analogical principle also to myth, religion, and theology.
The Compass of Philosophy (New York, 1954) by Newton
P. Stallknecht and Robert S. Brumbaugh carry on much the
same idea by their stress on “key concepts” in metaphysics.
And Charles Morris' Paths of Life (New York, 1942) is also
relevant for a sort of statistical confirmation of the influence
of “key concepts” in the attitudes of ordinary men.
C. I. Lewis' Mind and the World Order (New York, 1929)
has already been mentioned for stimulating the metaphori-
cal conception of metaphysics. Hans Vaihinger in his Die
Philosophie des Als-Ob (Berlin, 1911), trans. C. K. Ogden as
Philosophy of As If (New York, 1924) was influential by
distinguishing between scientific hypotheses, which could
be true, and fictions (As If's), which could not be true but
had useful semi-cognitive functions. And metaphysical sys-
tems fell in the latter category. Philip Wheelright in his
The Burning Fountain (Bloomington, Ind., 1954) and Meta-
phor and Reality (Bloomington, Ind., 1962) speaks of the
language of metaphor and the language of science as two
equally legitimate ways of gaining cognitive insight into
two different aspects of the world. Max Black, on the other
hand, in his Models and Metaphors (Ithaca, N.Y., 1954)
makes no such cognitive division but regards metaphors and
models as valuable explanatory devices whether in the
special sciences or in comprehensive metaphysics. This leads
to Thomas Kuhn's still stronger view in The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, 1962), which, as pointed out
already, regards models and paradigms (virtually in the role
of root metaphors) as central explanatory instruments in
science. For an exceptionally intensive and original treat-
ment of metaphor in metaphysics and science (and poetry
too) the two articles by D. Berggram on “The Use and Abuse
of Metaphor” in the Review of Metaphysics, 16 (1962/1963)
are recommended.
STEPHEN C. PEPPER
[See also Ambiguity;
Analogy; Antinomy; Form; Literary
Paradox;
Metaphor in Religious Discourse; Myth; Pragma-
tism; Symbol.]
