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.