Qattan1

Umar Qattan
Professor Mansfield
English M01CH
13 May 2013
Word Count: 845
Honors Project Paper:
Lakoffs Buffet of Fallacies
George Lakoff writes Dont Think of an Elephant to differentiate political metaphorical
models of the conservatives and progressives. He delineates the conservatives around the Strict
Father Family model and the progressives around the Nurturing Parent Family model. There are
several serious problems with the models that Lakoff presents. There does not exist such
metaphorical models as Strict Father and Nurturing Parent families because the ways by which
Lakoff justifies their existence consist of the following: [1] he creates a false dichotomy between
two polar opposing family types, [2] provides contradictory evidence to support his false
dichotomy, and [3] he begs the question that his established metaphors are sufficient to say that
each political ideology abides by its respective metaphorical model (Lakoff 1-124).
First of all, Lakoff commits the either-or fallacy or false dichotomy fallacy when he
identifies only two political metaphorical models: Strict Father and Nurturing Parent Families
(13). The reason there is no perfect polarization between conservatives and progressives is that
conservatives hold similar views that progressives hold and vice versa. As Lakoff outlines the
conservatives using the Strict Father Family model, he states that it is the fathers job to protect
and support the family, and his children are supposed to respect and remain obedient with him.
Also it is his moral responsibility to advise his children the differences between right and wrong
(17). In other words, if the conservatives ideology were congruent with the Strict Father Family
model, then conservatives unquestionably desire to protect the country and its interests, promote
competition so that disciplined moral people and undisciplined immoral people receive what they
deserve based upon their own merit, and maintain order (Lakoff 28). However, it is also in the

Qattan2
progressives best interest to teach their children to become better citizens so that order is
maintained (29). Thus, there is no set dichotomy between the two seemingly opposing
ideologies, since the only noticeable difference between them is the way they maintain order.
Moreover, Lakoff contradicts himself when he provides evidence against his dichotomy
when he discusses sound bites from past political debates. An example where he demonstrates
this is when he examines Al Gores sound bite. He provides Gores quote taken from the GoreBush debate in 2000: Give parents the tools to protect their children against culture pollution
(33). Whats interesting about this example is that Gore is a progressive, yet his quote aligns with
that of the Strict Father model. The reason is that Gore says that culture pollution as an immoral
thing, and thus must be controlled authoritatively (34). However, by Lakoff, conservatives align
with the Strict Father model. Lakoff offers more evidence to the contrary when he identifies a
quote from Bush in the same debate where Bush seems to align well with the Nurturing Parent
model: And thats the case where we need to use our influence to have countries in Africa come
together and help deal with the situation (39). While Bush is a conservative, his proposed course
of action easily aligns him with the Nurturing Parent model because he seeks to tie a variety of
African societies together so that the community grows as a whole. Therefore, there is evidence
that shows that not all progressives follow the Nurturing Parent model and that not all
conservatives follow the Strict Father model.
Furthermore, when Lakoff continues to associate conservatives with the Strict Father
model and the progressives with the Nurturing Parent model, he begs the question that his
established dichotomy holds true. The reason he begs the question is that he does not provide any
actual support for his dichotomy. That is, he proves the existence of the models by his own
definitions of the models. There is no concrete evidence that supports Lakoffs presuppositions.
The only way he can test the validity of his dichotomy is to count the number of Strict Father and

Qattan3
Nurturing Parent type sound bites of each candidate in a presidential candidate debatefor
exampleand compare the numbers. Out of Gores several thousand sound bites, around thirtyfive were phrases were associated with the Nurturing Parent model, and out of Bushs sound
bites, around forty of them were associated with the Strict Father model (Lakoff 43). Although
the evidence suggests that Lakoffs dichotomy holds, the evidence is statistically insignificant to
conclude that this occurs with all conservatives and progressives alike.
Contrary to Lakoffs hypothesis that states that there is a political dichotomy that
conservatives follow the Strict Father metaphorical model while progressives follow the
Nurturing Parent model, there is significant evidence to reject the proposed hypothesis. The fact
that he creates a political dipole where all conservatives and progressives follow their own, and
only their own, political ideologies, begs the question as to how he formulated that hypothesis in
the first place. Lakoff derives the evidence he provides on his own, i.e. through the utilization of
circular logic. Thus, it is evident that Lakoffs Nurturing Parent and Strict Father model theory is
flawed and invalid.

Works Cited
Lakoff, George, Howard Dean, and Don Hazen. Don't Think of an Elephant! White River
Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Pub., 2004. Print.