Similarity between Analogy Argument and Generalization Argument
- Both forms of the argument begin with a sample
- identify property of the members of that sample
- and conclude that the property is also shared by one or more items outside the sample
Difference between Analogy Argument and Generalization Argument
I.G.A: the target is a group of things..
A.A: the target is one single thing..
when you compare between 2 or more things.
used in explanations, illustrations or descriptions.
the topic that the conclusion is about.
main subject that it will be compared to.
ex: dogs are a lot like wolves.
dogs = primary subject.
the subject that the primary subject is being compared to.
ex: dogs are a lot like wolves
wolves = analogue.
a relatively similar case that has already been resolved. Do you be consistent and treat each case the same? or differently?
refutation by logical analogy
The refutation of one argument by the construction of another that is parallel to it in reasoning and is clearly flawed.
a prirori analogy
- may be real or imaginary.
- there is an appeal to consistency.
two or more things are similar in some respects and concludes that they are probably also similar in some further respect.
when the argument is so loose and remote that there is virtually no support for the conclusion.
fallacy of two wrongs make a right
saying it’s correct because two wrong things are similar and one is tolerated, the other should be tolerated as well.
(misuses the appeal to consistency)
ex: we kill farm animals for food, so why can’t we kill cats and dogs for food.
Fallacy of slippery precedent
argument based on saying that a certain action is bad (actually good) should not be permitted because it will set a precedent for further similar actions that are bad.
Evaluating Inductive Analogy
- primary subject
- identify similarities between primary subject and analogue
- are the premises acceptable?
3. Number of Similarities:
- assess the G condition
difference between a priori and analogy
a priori: common in ethics, law and in matters of classification. can be real or imaginary. Consistency is important.
inductive analogy: common in history, medicine and science. Analogue can only be something that exists now or used to exist.
- a,b,c,d all have the attributes P and Q
- a,b,c all have the attribute R
- therefore, d probably has the attribute R
principle of consistency
similar cases ought to be treated similarly.
B is like A in many ways
A has property G
therefore, probably B has property G