Well, consider the value of metaphor as a catch-all term:
a symbol is an abstraction representing something it is not.
a metaphor is an abstraction representing something it is not.
a number is an abstraction representing something it is not.
They are functionally equivalent. It may seem strange to
consider numbers-as-metaphors; but I think that is because we're
trained to see metaphors as "not exactly". Yet even numbers are
"not exactly" but close. To use numbers or mathematics
effectively, a lot of information has to be discarded in order
to use mathematics effectively. The process of clearing away
"irrelevant-for-this-calculation" *is* very handy; it allows us
to focus on deeper internal connections that might otherwise be
hard to spot.
It works so well that we can abstract math into flip/flip (with
no middle) and use it to make our computers function, bringing
us a digitized version of reality.
Yet, it's an abstraction just the same. A representation - a
metaphor.
I know it sounds strange... and there's pre-existing words like
symbol that are better for general usage. Still, I think some
fundamental connections can often get lost in the process of
creating different words meaning very similar concepts, so much
so that they *appear* to have no connection between them when in
fact, they're joined at their root concept and are functionally
equivalent.
