Read on Twitter
Speaking of other divides and hardening of the categories: As some of you know (because of my pinned thread and the strange story), I've been spending quite a bit of time trying to understand topics like how coronavirus affects the RAS, ACE2, etc. (Thanks for your forbearance.)
In other words, I've been throwing myself in over my head... into science. It's not comfortable. But it's what I want to do. And as a writer and lifelong "creative," I'm noticing the obvious: Scientists *often* don't use metaphor & analogy: our most powerful communication tools.
The reasons for this, well, absence are equally obvious: Analogies and metaphors can be imprecise; and scientists fear imprecision (rightly so.) But... these tools... metaphor and analogy don't simply help one "package up" something and make it digestible.
They (and this my main contention) *can help* one explore (or even discover) new symmetries and relationships. This is, in part, their great power.
I've cited this before, but it bears on this thread: Poet Coleridge attended the scientific seminars of the great Sir Humphry Davy. Why? Because he sought to rebuild his store of metaphors. I believe it's time that that loop is completed. Because I know this to be true...
When metaphor and analogy are applied... precisely... they open up new avenues... for, yes, scientific discovery. A poverty of imagination does not great science make. (See the book, The Age of Wonder... for examples.)
