Exercise4.2.11

PHI332 : The Class : Argument Evaluation : Analogy : Exercise4.2.11

Exercise4.2.11: Evaluating a parallel argument

You have practiced and are familiar with steps 1, 2 and 3 of the process of using an argument from analogy to object to or evaluate a target argument. As you practiced identifying the arguments of Thomson and Warren, it is likely that you wanted to evaluate them-perhaps you couldn't keep from exclaiming "What a great analogy!" or "What a stupid analogy!"

In this submodule you will learn how to evaluate any argument from analogy. Just as you have learned to raise objections to objections (and so on indefinitely far), so too now you will learn how to make targets of arguments that themselves have target arguments (and this reflective process, like raising objections, can be continued indefinitely far).

Recall the structure you can identify in any argument from analogy:

As always, there are two places to test any argument: ask if its premise is true and if its conclusion follows. Here is how to do this test with any argument from analogy.

Test 1 Does the conclusion of the analog really not follow? If you agree with the author about the conclusion of the analog, go on to step 2. If on the other hand you disagree with author about the conclusion of the analog, try to adjust the analog so that you agree with the author. Using this adjusted analog, go on to test 2.
Test 2 Is the analogy good? Compare target and analog, listing disanalogies. Then determine if any of these disanalogies are relevant.

Let's practice test 1 first. For each of the following analogs, the question you will ask is not, "Is it a good analogy?" but merely "Does the conclusion follow?" If you do not agree with the author about the conclusion, then try to make adjustments until you do agree with the author.

Download Word file.

Once you have completed this excercise you should:

Go on to Exercise4-2-12
or
Go back to Argument from Analogy

E-mail George Rudebusch at George.Rudebusch@nau.edu
or call (520) 523-7091