Causation Is Control Over Relative Location

metaphor

Source: Governance → Causal Reasoning

Categories: cognitive-sciencelinguisticsphilosophy

From: Master Metaphor List

Transfers

To cause something is to control where things are relative to each other. This metaphor maps the governance of spatial relations — determining proximity, distance, alignment, and arrangement between entities — onto causal reasoning. Unlike the entity-to-location variant (which focuses on placing one thing at one place), this version foregrounds the relationship between two or more entities: the causal agent controls whether things are near or far, together or apart, aligned or opposed. It is part of the location-case Event Structure system, with special emphasis on relational positioning.

Key structural parallels:

• Causing connection as bringing together — “The treaty brought the two nations closer.” “Shared grief drew them together.” “The merger united the two companies.” The causal agent reduces the distance between entities. Creating a relationship or agreement is making things spatially proximate.
• Causing separation as pulling apart — “The dispute drove a wedge between them.” “The scandal tore the party apart.” “Competition separated the leaders from the pack.” The causal agent increases the distance between entities. Causing division or conflict is forcing things away from each other.
• Causing alignment as arranging — “The coach got everyone on the same page.” “The new policy brought operations into line.” “She aligned the team’s priorities.” The causal agent arranges entities into a shared orientation. Causing agreement or coordination is making things face the same direction.
• Causing disorder as disarranging — “The announcement threw everything out of alignment.” “The crisis knocked plans off course.” “His departure upset the whole arrangement.” The causal agent disrupts the spatial relations between entities. Causing dysfunction is disordering a previously arranged set.
• Maintaining relations as holding in place — “She kept the coalition together.” “The treaty held the balance of power.” “Tradition keeps communities close.” The causal agent preserves the existing spatial relations between entities. Sustaining a state of affairs is preventing rearrangement.

Limits

• Relative location implies two parties — the metaphor requires at least two entities whose spatial relation is being controlled. But many causal processes affect a single entity’s internal state (stress causes fatigue) without an obvious second entity to be positioned relative to. The relational frame has nothing to say about intrinsic change.
• Spatial relations are symmetric; causal relations often are not — if A is close to B, then B is close to A. But if a policy brings employers and employees closer, the effect may be asymmetric: employers may feel more in control while employees feel more constrained. The spatial symmetry masks causal asymmetry.
• The geometry is too simple — real relationships involve trust, obligation, power, history, and emotion. Reducing these to proximity and alignment strips away most of what matters. Two entities can be “close” in completely different ways (close allies, close competitors, close relatives), and the spatial metaphor collapses these distinctions.
• Control implies a single arranger — the metaphor positions a causal agent as the one who arranges entities relative to each other. But many relational changes are emergent: market forces bring competitors together, cultural shifts drive generations apart. There is no governor controlling the layout.
• Reversibility is assumed — if you can bring things together, you can presumably push them apart. But some caused relationships are irreversible: once trust is broken, you cannot simply move the pieces back to their original positions. The spatial frame makes reconciliation seem like a matter of rearrangement.

Expressions

• “The treaty brought the two nations closer” — causing alliance as reducing distance between entities
• “The scandal drove a wedge between them” — causing division as forcing an object between two entities to increase distance
• “She pulled the team together” — causing cohesion as gathering entities into proximity
• “The dispute pushed them further apart” — causing estrangement as increasing spatial separation
• “He got everyone on the same page” — causing agreement as aligning entities to a shared position
• “The crisis threw everything out of order” — causing dysfunction as disrupting spatial arrangement
• “Competition separated the leaders from the rest” — causing differentiation as increasing distance between groups
• “The reform bridged the gap between rich and poor” — causing equality as reducing spatial distance between groups

Origin Story

This metaphor is documented in the Master Metaphor List (Lakoff, Espenson & Schwartz 1991) as part of the location-case Event Structure system. It is a variant that emphasizes relative position rather than absolute position: where CAUSATION IS CONTROL OVER AN ENTITY RELATIVE TO A LOCATION focuses on placing one thing at one place, this metaphor focuses on the spatial relations between multiple entities. The distinction matters because much of human reasoning about causation concerns relationships — alliances, separations, alignments — rather than states of individual entities. The metaphor is grounded in early spatial experience: infants observe that agents can push things together and pull things apart, and this relational-spatial logic extends to reasoning about all forms of social and abstract causation.

References

• Lakoff, G., Espenson, J. & Schwartz, A. Master Metaphor List (1991), “Causation Is Control Over Relative Location”
• Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. Philosophy in the Flesh (1999) — the Event Structure metaphor system, location case

Related Entries

• Causation Is Control Over An Entity Relative To A Location
• Causation Is Control Over An Object Relative To A Possessor
• Causes Are Forces
• States Are Locations
• Change Is Motion

Structural Neighbors

Entries from different domains that share structural shape. Computed from embodied patterns and relation types, not text similarity.

• A Schedule Is a Moving Object (physics/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause, prevent
• Life Is a Journey (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, prevent
• Linear Scales Are Paths (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause
• Long-Term Purposeful Activity Is a Journey (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause
• Long-Term Purposeful Change Is a Journey (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause
• Means of Change Is Path over Which Motion Occurs (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause
• The Progress of External Events Is Forward Motion (journeys/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause
• Time Is a Moving Object (embodied-experience/metaphor) near-far, force, path, cause

Structural Tags

Patterns: near-farforcepath

Relations: causecoordinateprevent

Structure: pipeline Level: primitive

Contributors: agent:metaphorex-miner