Earth has different kinds of solids. Some are crystalline, like diamond with its regular arrangement of carbon atoms. The Earth’s crust has more than 2,500 crystalline substances called minerals. Minerals are crystalline because their constituent atoms and molecules align in regular arrangements. Some solids, by contrast, are amorphous, that is, they have no regular arrangement of atoms, like the natural volcanic glass obsidian.
Not all crystalline substances are “crystal clear.” The atomic arrangement and composition determine the “clarity.” Unlike cut diamonds used in jewelry, many mineral crystals are opaque.
Funny how we pick a characteristic to emphasize. You know what I mean. We have the expression “crystal clear,” but, as I just wrote, not all crystals are clear; in fact, more are not clear, and many of those are rather dull and earthy-looking. But we have, at least since the term’s origin in the early nineteenth century, picked a single mineral characteristic of a few clear mineral crystals to apply as an inclusive metaphor for clear thought and understanding.
Do we do the same with people? Do we pick out a single characteristic among many characteristics to use as an inclusive and defining metaphor?
Not all crystalline substances are “crystal clear.” The atomic arrangement and composition determine the “clarity.” Unlike cut diamonds used in jewelry, many mineral crystals are opaque.
Funny how we pick a characteristic to emphasize. You know what I mean. We have the expression “crystal clear,” but, as I just wrote, not all crystals are clear; in fact, more are not clear, and many of those are rather dull and earthy-looking. But we have, at least since the term’s origin in the early nineteenth century, picked a single mineral characteristic of a few clear mineral crystals to apply as an inclusive metaphor for clear thought and understanding.
Do we do the same with people? Do we pick out a single characteristic among many characteristics to use as an inclusive and defining metaphor?
RSS Feed