Ordinary language is all right.
One could divide humanity into two classes:
those who master a metaphor, and those who hold by a formula.
Those with a bent for both are too few, they do not comprise a class.
Not, of course, that that's all he's good for.
I have lots of Tom Waits records though.
Well, sometimes I do.
As if I want to put my headphones on and start galumping down the sidewalk.
That is to say, not a lot, but at least some.
I believe I have stated before how much I resent "Rainy Day Women #12 & 35" being there.
It is not uncommon in philosophy to suggest (or worse) that if a theory developed to explain or justify something is not able to preserve all of our pre-theoretical intuitions, this is just fine because some of those intuitions are wrong. I can't condone this for most of the things I'm interested in (questions about value, taste, meaning, pleasure, etc.) because in most cases the only reasons available to support the idea that these intuitions could be wrong are a) the attractiveness and desirability of an elegant theory uncluttered by its attempts to adequately take all intuitions into account, and b) intuitions we have been mislead into having by past theories which discounted the "wrong" intuitions.
I realize there is a circle here.
A theory I have about Supa Dupa Fly but which I haven't decided about yet is that it about equally supports relaxed sleepy-head headnodding and jittery excitable twitching. I consider that pretty remarkable.
Oh, and I mean, in the same song, usually.