David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Teaching Philosophy 20 (1):49-60 (1997)
This paper critiques the standard presentation of arguments from analogy in logic textbooks and offers an alternative way of understanding them which renders them both more plausible and more easily evaluated for their strength. The typical presentation presents analogies as inductive arguments in which a set of properties, known to be shared by two logical domains, supports an inference about a further property, known to belong to one domain and inferred to belong to the target domain. But framed in these terms, the strength of the argument depends entirely on the relevance of the known shared properties to the inferred shared property, meaning the argument rests on an unstated assumption. Against this view, the author maintains that arguments from analogy are figurative ways of addressing properties of the target logical domain. By comparing or contrasting two logical domains, analogies articulate a general principle which illustrates something difficult to imagine or to describe literally about the target domain. Analogies can be reformulated and evaluated as deductive arguments on this view, with their chief logical import being the inquiry they incite in students as to whether the general principle is true and sufficiently general to apply to the target domain
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael J. Wreen (2007). A Second Form of Argument From Analogy. Theoria 73 (3):221-239.
P. R. Wilson (1964). On the Argument by Analogy. Philosophy of Science 31 (1):34-39.
Richard I. Sikora (1977). The Argument From Analogy is Not an Argument for Other Mnds. American Philosophical Quarterly 14 (April):137-41.
Paul F. Camenisch (1976). Abortion, Analogies and the Emergence of Value. Journal of Religious Ethics 4 (1):131 - 158.
Takashi Yagisawa (2005). A New Argument Against the Existence Requirement. Analysis 65 (285):39–42.
Allen MacNeill, TIDAC: Identity, Analogy, and Logical Argument in Science. The Evolution List.
Don Locke (1973). Just What is Wrong with the Argument From Analogy? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 51 (August):153-56.
Graham Oppy (2002). Paley's Argument for Design. Philo 5 (2):161-173.
Anton Tupa (2009). Killing, Letting Die, and the Morality of Abortion. Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):1-26.
Ulf Zackariasson (2006). A Problem with Alston's Indirect Analogy-Argument From Religious Experience. Religious Studies 42 (3):329-341.
Brian Jonathan Garrett (2006). What the History of Vitalism Teaches Us About Consciousness and the "Hard Problem". Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (3):576 - 588.
André Juthe (2005). Argument by Analogy. Argumentation 19 (1):1-27.
Branden Fitelson (2008). Goodman's "New Riddle". Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):613 - 643.
John Perry (2010). Gentiles and Homosexuals: A Brief History of an Analogy. Journal of Religious Ethics 38 (2):321-347.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads9 ( #358,978 of 1,796,239 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #208,698 of 1,796,239 )
How can I increase my downloads?