When judging analogies saying that one side of the analogy is like the other is too vague to use as a premise. To evaluate an analogy you have to consider:
1. Is this an argument? What is the conclusion?
2. What is the comparison?
3. What are the premises? (one or both sides of the comparison)
4. What are the similarities?
5. Can we state the similarities as premises and find a general principle that covers the two sides?
6. Does the general principle really apply to both sides? Do the differences matter?
7. Is the argument strong or valid? Is it good?
Example:
Police offers are allowed to use their cell phone while driving. So everybody driving should be able to use his or her cell phone.
What do police officers have to do with regular people?
There are similarities such as them being licensed people who are able to drive and differences such as the type of car they drive and the clothes they wear, but these similarities and differences does not hit the main point of the argument.
Police officers may be able to use their cell phone for job purposes, but regular people use their cell phone for their own pleasure, which can risk the life of another person on the road.
No comments:
Post a Comment