met-metaphor-method

name	met - Metaphor Method
description	A systematic method for using metaphors to:
output	{"format":"prose"}

Metaphor Method

Overview

A systematic method for using metaphors to:

• Discover relationships that aren't obvious
• Generate new perspectives on problems
• Test whether discovered relationships are valid
• Extract abstract structures that apply across domains

Core Principle

Metaphors are not just decorative language. They reveal structural similarities between domains. By mapping from one domain to another, we can discover relationships that transfer.

Steps

Step 1: Identify the target domain

What are you trying to understand better? This is the LITERAL domain you want insight into.

Example: "Philosophical conclusions"

Output: target_domain

Step 2: Find a source metaphor

What is the target domain LIKE? Find a different domain that has structural similarities.

Good source metaphors:

• Are familiar (you know them well)
• Have clear structure (relationships are obvious)
• Are different enough to provide new perspective

Example: "Conclusions are like movie endings"

Output: source_metaphor

Step 3: Map relationships from source

In the source domain, what relationships exist? List them without yet checking if they apply to target.

Example (movie endings):

• Ending only makes sense given the plot
• Plot is driven by character motivations
• Good endings resolve tensions set up earlier
• Bad endings feel arbitrary

Output: source_relationships

Step 4: Translate to target domain

For each source relationship, what's the equivalent in target? Don't force it - some may not translate.

Example translations:

• "Ending → plot" becomes "conclusion → argument"
• "Character motivations" becomes "goals/problems"
• "Resolve tensions" becomes "solve problems set up"
• "Arbitrary endings" becomes "arbitrary conclusions"

Output: translated_relationships

Step 5: Test translations

For each translated relationship, ask:

• Is this actually true in the target domain?
• Can I find examples that confirm it?
• Can I find counterexamples?

Keep relationships that pass testing. Discard or modify those that don't.

Output: tested_relationships

Step 6: Extract abstract structure

For relationships that survive testing, what's the abstract structure? This is the pattern that applies to BOTH domains.

Example: "Terminal points (endings/conclusions) are evaluated relative to their trajectory (plot/argument) and driving forces (motivations/goals)"

This abstract structure is the real insight.

Output: abstract_structure

Step 7: Apply to new metaphors (iterate)

Take the abstract structure and find OTHER metaphors that instantiate it. This tests the structure's generality and may reveal new aspects.

Example: Journey metaphor also has terminal point (destination), trajectory (route), and driving forces (reasons for travel).

What new relationships does the journey metaphor reveal?

Output: iterated_insights