Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions

Argumentation 31 (2):221-243 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure and the defeasibility conditions of argument from analogy, addressing the issues of determining the nature of the comparison underlying the analogy and the types of inferences justifying the conclusion. In the dialectical tradition, different forms of similarity were distinguished and related to the possible inferences that can be drawn from them. The kinds of similarity can be divided into four categories, depending on whether they represent fundamental semantic features of the terms of the comparison or non-semantic ones, indicating possible characteristics of the referents. Such distinct types of similarity characterize different kinds of analogical arguments, all based on a similar general structure, in which a common genus is abstracted. Depending on the nature of the abstracted common feature, different rules of inference will apply, guaranteeing the attribution of the analogical predicate to the genus and to the primary subject. This analysis of similarity and the relationship thereof with the rules of inference allows a deeper investigation of the defeasibility conditions.

Similar books and articles

Asymmetrical Analogical Arguments.J. E. Adler - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (1):83-92.
Analogy and confirmation theory.Mary Hesse - 1964 - Philosophy of Science 31 (4):319-327.
Analogy.Todd Davies - 1985 - In CSLI Informal Notes Series, IN-CSLI-4. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Verdi is the puccini of music.John Woods & Brent Hudak - 1992 - Synthese 92 (2):189 - 220.
Plantinga and other minds.Karl Ameriks - 1978 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 16 (4):285-91.
Analogical inferences are central to analogy.Arthur B. Markman & Jeffrey P. Laux - 2008 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (4):390-391.
Analogical Deduction via a Calculus of Predicables.Joseph P. Li Vecchi - 2014 - Logik, Naturphilosophie, Dialektik, Zur Modernen Deutung der Aristotelischen Logik, 10.
Analogical Reasoning in Ethics.Georg Spielthenner - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (5):861-874.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-07-30

Downloads
661 (#26,806)

6 months
262 (#9,104)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Fabrizio Macagno
Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa
Douglas Walton
Last affiliation: University of Windsor
Christopher Tindale
University of Windsor

References found in this work

Models and Analogies in Science.Mary B. Hesse - 1963 - [Notre Dame, Ind.]: University of Notre Dame Press.
Argumentation schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Christopher Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
Models and Analogies in Science.Mary Hesse - 1965 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 16 (62):161-163.
The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.

View all 54 references / Add more references