Chapter 11 Flashcards
Analogies: Reasoning from case to case
Q: What is an analogy?
A: A parallel or comparison between two or several cases. Analogies may be used as the basis for arguments when people reason from one or several cases to a conclusion about another case deemed to be similar to the first. In addition, analogies are used in explanations, or as illustrations, or in descriptions.
Q: What is a primary subject?
A: In an argument by analogy, the topic that the conclusion is about.
Q: What is an analogue?
A: In an argument by analogy, the thing to which the primary subject is compared and on the basis of which the arguer reasons to the conclusion about the primary subject. Some arguments by analogy use several analogues.
Q: What are the appeals to consistency?
A: Arguments relying on analogy and urging that relevantly similar cases be treated similarly. If A is relevantly similar to B, and if B has been treated as X then, as a matter of consistency, A should be treated as X. Appeals to consistency are especially common in logic, law, ethics, and administration.
Q: What is a precedent?
A: A relevantly similar case that has already been resolved. Reasoning by precedent is particularly common and important in law.
Q: What is a conceptual issue?
A: An issue in which the question at stake is how a concept should be applied and how it should be articulated.
Q: What is refutation by logical analogy?
A: The refutation of one argument by the construction of another that is parallel to it in reasoning and is clearly flawed.
Q: What is a priori analogy?
A: An argument by analogy in which there is an appeal to consistency and in which the analogue may be entirely hypothetical or fictitious without undermining the logical force of the argument.
Q: What is an inductive analogy?
A: An argument by analogy in which the conclusion is predicted on the basis of experience of one or several analogue cases deemed to be empirically similar to the primary case. The analogue must be a real case, and the factual features of the analogue and the primary subject are essential for determining the strength of an argument.
Q: What is Counter analogy?
A: An analogy different from the one on which an argument is based and leading plausibly to a conclusion contrary to that of the original argument. If the counter- analogy is well founded as the original one, the argument based on counter analogy will constitute a powerful criticism on the original argument.
Q: What is a faulty analogy?
A: Name for a fallacious argument in which the analogy is so loose and remote that there is virtually no support for the conclusion.
Q: what is the of The Fallacy of two wrongs make a right?
A: Mistake of inferring that because two wrong things are similar, and one is tolerated, the other should be tolerated as well. This sort of argument misuses the appeal to consistency. This fallacy is often simply called two wrongs.
Q: What is the fallacy of slippery assimilation?
A: Argument based on the logical error of assuming that because cases can be arranged in a series, where the difference between successive members of the series is small, the cases should all be assimilated. This is a mistaken appeal to consistency. It ignores incorrectly the fact that small differences can cumulate to be significant.
Q: What is the fallacy of slippery precedent?
A: Argument based on claiming that an action, though good, should not be permitted because it will set a precedent for further similar actions that are bad. Such arguments are flawed in that they use implicitly inconsistent premises. A good action cannot be relevantly similar to a bad action; there must be some relevant difference between them.
