ANALOGY
To give an analogy is to claim that two distinct things are alike or similar in some respect. Here are two examples :
- Capitalists are like vampires.
- Like the Earth, Mars has an atmosphere containing oxygen.
The analogies above are not arguments. But analogies are often used in arguments. To argue by analogy is to argue that because two things are similar, what is true of one is also true of the other. Such arguments are called "analogical arguments" or "arguments by analogy". By re writing the analogy above, we could change it into an analogical arguments.
- Capitalist will suck off every money from you just like the vampire.
- There might be life on Mars because it has an atmosphere that contains oxygen just like the Earth.
Analogical arguments rely on analogies, and the first point to note about analogies is that any two objects are bound to be similar in some ways and not others. A sparrow is very different from a car, but they are still similar in that they can both move. A washing machine is very different from a society, but they both contain parts and produce waste. So in general, when we make use of analogical arguments, it is important to make clear in what ways are two things supposed to be similar. We can then proceed to determine whether the two things are indeed similar in the relevant respects, and whether those aspects of similarity supports the conclusion.
ANALOGICAL ARGUMENTS AND INDUCTION
It is sometimes suggested that all analogical arguments make use of inductive reasoning but it is not entirely correct.Here is some examples on the make use of inductive reasoning in analogical argument :
(Premise 1) B is like A in many ways.
(Premise 2) A have the property of G
(Conclusion) So, B has the property of G
(Premise 1) Y is a sunflower.
(Premise 2) Every sunflower have sunflower seeds.
(Conclusion) Y have sunflower seeds.
What the examples try to show is that:
- Some good analogical arguments are deductively valid.
- Sometimes we can argue for a conclusion more directly without making use of analogies. This might reveal more clearly the reasons that support the conclusion.
Of course, analogical arguments can also be employed in inductive reasoning. Example :
This novel is supposed to have a similar plot like the other one we have read, so probably it is also very boring.
This argument is of course not deductively valid. Just because the plot of novel X is similar to the plot of a boring novel Y, it does not follow logically that X is also boring. Perhaps novel X is a good read despite an unimpressive plot because its pace is a lot faster and the story telling is more gripping and graphic. But if no such information is available, and all we know about novel X is that its plot is like the plot of Y, which is not very interesting, then we would be justified in thinking that it is more likely for X to be boring than to be interesting
There are a few ways on how to evaluate the strength of an analogical arguments. Here are some guidelines for deciding whether to accept someone's argument by analogy.
- Examine whether the premises are true
- Ask yourself whether the similarities are relevant
- Consider the number of relevant similarities
- Consider how relevant are the dissimilarities
CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP AND CAUSAL ARGUMENTS.
Causal arguments, like analogical arguments and generalizations, will always be invalid, that is, the truth of the premises do not guarantee the truth of the conclusion. Rather, causal arguments have varying degrees of strength, that is, the truth of their premises provides a conclusion that is true with some degree of probability or likelihood.
CAUSAL CLAIM AND CAUSAL ARGUMENTS
A causal claim is one that asserts that there is a relationship between two events such that one is the effect of the other. A causal claim takes the form of "x causes y," with x referring to the cause and y referring to the effect. A causal argument provides the premises to support a conclusion about a cause and effect relationship.It is essential to a causal claim is a relationship between two events such that one is the effect of the other.
EVALUATING CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP
There are three ways in evaluating causal relationship.The mistakes that we tend to do when evaluating cause and effect are:-
- Overlooking a common cause
I notice when I get a sore throat, it will be not long before I get a runny nose. I conclude that sore throat are the cause of runny nose.
This actually overlook the common cause that the two things (runny nose and sore throat) are cause by virus, not one by the other
- Tracing the cause backwards
Bad eyesight is caused by watching TV too closely
We have not clearly established which one of the two things really comes first. We simply assume we know which one comes first but in reality, it maybe the other way around.
- Looking too hard for a cause
Example:
Wearing my favorite T-shirt will make my team wins the game.
As a result we might continue to wear the shirt for good luck. It is easy to see how this kind of mistakes can lead to superstitious belief.
- Correlations
Example:
Since you start seeing that girl you grades have gone down. She's obviously been distracting you from your work, so you mustn't see her anymore.
Correlations is not a cause.
"Rooster syndrome" -- Believing that the rooster's crowing causes the sun to rise.
0 comments:
Post a Comment