The concern with the God’s eye view of reason has left with a terribly impoverished view of human reason. The study of human categorization makes that clear. What is need is a cognitive semantics-an empirically adequate account of what human reason is like. [...]To the extent that systems like the predicate calculus correctly reflect some aspects of human reason, a corresponding cognitive semantics might be constructed using image schemas, metaphors and metonymies as follows: Briefly, two basic metaphors are used: CLASSES ARE CONTAINERS and THE PROPER SUBCLASS RELATION IS THE PART-WHOLE RELATION.
- Lakoff (1987), a pag.365-366

What makes cognitive semantics interesting is that it opens up the study of human reason to areas that were previously closed off because reason was viewed as being limited to objectivist logic. In cognitive semantics, the study of the general forms of metaphoric, metonymic and image-schematic reason is no longer off-limits. This is human reason, not transcendental reason. It can in principle be characterized with appropriate precision. It can apply to any subject matter that we can understand using image schemas, metaphors, and metonymies. That is an extraordinarily wide range of subject matter. It includes the subject matter of classical logic as a small subpart.
- Lakoff (1987), a pag.367