Out of all the types of reasoning I would have to say that the reasoning by analogy was the most difficult for me to understand. Reading the book and the link still had me confused about what it meant. I had to read my peers’ posts about the reasoning to understand it even more. Reading the Wikipedia site didn’t really help me because it got me confused with inductive reasoning. I wasn’t sure if the two were the same or not, with inductive reasoning being the modern view of it or not. Going through a website, I learned that there are four steps: 1. Identify the analogy by recognizing the similarities between objects or situations, 2. State the purpose of the analogy, 3. Assess the source of your analogy, and 4. Evaluate the ambiguities, dissimilarities, false attributions that may weaken or break the analogy. Reasoning by analogy is just like saying: “since it was O.K. there, it should be O.K. here” or “since we concluded here, we can conclude there.”
Example: Dogs are like people. So if they are neglected through care, so will people.
No comments:
Post a Comment