False analogy
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

Argument from analogy or false analogy is a special type of
inductive argument Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which a general principle is derived from a body of observations. It consists of making broad generalizations based on specific observations. Inductive reasoning is distinct from ''deductive'' re ...
, whereby perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has yet to be observed. Analogical reasoning is one of the most common methods by which human beings attempt to understand the world and make decisions. When a person has a bad experience with a product and decides not to buy anything further from the producer, this is often a case of analogical reasoning. It is also implicit in much of science; for instance, experiments on laboratory rats typically proceed on the basis that some physiological similarities between rats and humans entails some further similarity (e.g. possible reactions to a drug).


Structure

The process of analogical inference involves noting the shared properties of two or more things, and from this basis inferring that they also share some further property. The structure or form may be generalized like so: : P and Q are similar in respect to properties a, b, and c. : P has been observed to have further property x. : Therefore, Q probably has property x also. The argument does not assert that the two things are ''identical'', only that they are ''similar''. The argument may provide us with ''good evidence'' for the conclusion, but the conclusion does not follow as a matter of
logical necessity Logical truth is one of the most fundamental concepts in logic. Broadly speaking, a logical truth is a statement which is true regardless of the truth or falsity of its constituent propositions. In other words, a logical truth is a statement whic ...
. Determining the strength of the argument requires that we take into consideration more than just the ''form'': the ''content'' must also come under scrutiny.


Analyzing arguments from analogy


Strength of an analogy

Several affect the strength of the argument from analogy: * The (positive or negative) of the ''known'' similarities to the similarity ''inferred in the conclusion''. * The of relevant similarity (or dissimilarity) between the two objects. * The and of instances that form the basis of the analogy.


Counterarguments

Arguments from analogy may be attacked by use of disanalogy, counteranalogy, and by pointing out unintended consequences of an analogy. In order to understand how one might go about analyzing an argument from analogy, consider the
teleological argument The teleological argument (from ; also known as physico-theological argument, argument from design, or intelligent design argument) is an argument for the existence of God or, more generally, that complex functionality in the natural world w ...
and the criticisms of this argument put forward by the philosopher
David Hume David Hume (; born David Home; 7 May 1711 NS (26 April 1711 OS) – 25 August 1776) Cranston, Maurice, and Thomas Edmund Jessop. 2020 999br>David Hume" '' Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved 18 May 2020. was a Scottish Enlightenment ph ...
. According to the analogical reasoning in the teleological argument, it would be ridiculous to assume that a complex object such as a watch came about through some random process. Since we have no problem at all inferring that such objects must have had an intelligent designer who created it for some purpose, we ought to draw the same conclusion for another complex and apparently designed object: the universe. Hume argued that the universe and a watch have many relevant dissimilarities; for instance, the universe is often very disorderly and random. This is the strategy of "disanalogy": just as the amount and variety of relevant similarities between two objects strengthens an analogical conclusion, so do the amount and variety of relevant dissimilarities weaken it. Creating a "counteranalogy," Hume argued that some natural objects seem to have order and complexity — snowflakes for example — but are not the result of intelligent direction. But then just as the snowflake's order and complexity itself might not have direction, the causes of the order and complexity might. So this would be an example of disproof by begging the question. Finally, Hume provides many possible "unintended consequences" of the argument; for instance, given that objects such as watches are often the result of the labor of groups of individuals, the reasoning employed by the teleological argument would seem to lend support to polytheism.


False analogy

A false analogy is a faulty instance of the argument from analogy. An argument from analogy is weakened if it is inadequate in any of the above respects. The term "false analogy" comes from the philosopher
John Stuart Mill John Stuart Mill (20 May 1806 – 7 May 1873) was an English philosopher, political economist, Member of Parliament (MP) and civil servant. One of the most influential thinkers in the history of classical liberalism, he contributed widely to ...
, who was one of the first individuals to engage in a detailed examination of analogical reasoning. One of Mill's examples involved an inference that some person is lazy from the observation that his or her sibling is lazy. According to Mill, sharing parents is not all that relevant to the property of laziness (although this in particular is an example of a
faulty generalization A faulty generalization is an informal fallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances of that phenomenon. It is similar to a proof by example in mathematics. It is an examp ...
rather than a false analogy).


Examples

A basic example: : Planets in a solar system orbit a star. : Electrons in an atom orbit a nucleus, and electrons jump instantly from orbit to orbit. : Therefore, planets in a solar system jump instantly from orbit to orbit. This is a false analogy because it fails to account for the relevant differences between a solar system and an atom.


See also

*
Case-based reasoning In artificial intelligence and philosophy, case-based reasoning (CBR), broadly construed, is the process of solving new problems based on the solutions of similar past problems. In everyday life, an auto mechanic who fixes an engine by recallin ...
*
Casuistry In ethics, casuistry ( ) is a process of reasoning that seeks to resolve moral problems by extracting or extending theoretical rules from a particular case, and reapplying those rules to new instances. This method occurs in applied ethics and ju ...
* *
Defeasible reasoning In philosophical logic, defeasible reasoning is a kind of reasoning that is rationally compelling, though not deductive reasoning, deductively valid. It usually occurs when a rule is given, but there may be specific exceptions to the rule, or su ...
*
Jurisprudence Jurisprudence, or legal theory, is the theoretical study of the propriety of law. Scholars of jurisprudence seek to explain the nature of law in its most general form and they also seek to achieve a deeper understanding of legal reasoning ...
*
Problem of induction First formulated by David Hume, the problem of induction questions our reasons for believing that the future will resemble the past, or more broadly it questions predictions about unobserved things based on previous observations. This inferen ...


References

{{Fallacies Inductive fallacies Analogy Inductive reasoning Philosophical arguments