Shine and Poverty of Metaphors in the Language of Sociology

Abstract

The reasons that lead to conclusions about the relevance or irrelevance of metaphors in the language of sociology are characterized when considering a sociologist as a scientist, professional and popularizer. The main problem points are the disorder of arguments of those who support metaphors in sociological texts and the undifferentiated views on roles of the sociologist in which he uses his professional language. Metaphors are justified because of either the property of language of predecessor sociologists, or the metaphorization of sociological criticism, or the certainty of individual authors regarding their use, or universal human cognitive properties, or modern living conditions. It seems more than relevant for sociology the experience of qualified criticism of metaphors, not because of their presence, but because of poor quality. It’s proved that a highly qualified sociologist and customers of his services have no grounds to consider the language of their science is irrelevant, and attention should be paid to disadvantages of the metaphors themselves – one-dimensionality, redundancy, isolation from human concerns, focus on cheap popularity. The degree of adequacy and completeness of metaphors in sociology is proposed to be established according to the criteria of absence of overvalued primitive content and presence of perspectivity in terms of reflecting long-term human relationships.