MORE ON ANALOGIES FINAL EXAM REVIEW CONTINUED STRUCTURE

MORE ON ANALOGIES FINAL EXAM REVIEW, CONTINUED

STRUCTURE Arguments from analogy reduce to a basic structure that can be expressed in the following way: P 1) PRIMARY ANALOGUE and SECONDARY ANALOGUE are alike in that they both have SIMILARITY. P 2) PRIMARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY. C) Therefore, SECONDARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY as well. To attack this, we should think: what hidden premise would make this a deductive argument? It looks something like this:

STRUCTURE Arguments from analogy reduce to a basic structure that can be expressed in the following way: P 1) PRIMARY ANALOGUE and SECONDARY ANALOGUE are alike in that they both have SIMILARITY. P 2) PRIMARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY. C) Therefore, SECONDARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY as well. To attack this, we should think: what hidden premise would make this a deductive argument? It looks something like this: [HP]: “If PRIMARY ANALOGUE and SECONDARY ANALOGUE both share SIMILARITY, and PRIMARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY, then SECONDARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY as well. “

MAYBE YOU HAVE MULTIPLE PRIMARY ANALOGUES…. P 1) SECONDARY ANALOGUE is like PRIMARY ANALOGUE 1, PRIMARY ANALOGUE 2, and PRIMARY ANALOGUE 3 in that they all share SIMILARITY. P 2) PRIMARY ANALOGUES 1, 2, and 3 also have PROPERTY. C) Therefore, SECONDARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY as well.

AND PROBABLY MULTIPLE SIMILARITIES… P 1) SECONDARY ANALOGUE is like PRIMARY ANALOGUE 1, PRIMARY ANALOGUE 2, and PRIMARY ANALOGUE 3 in that they all share SIMILARITY 1, SIMILARITY 2, and SIMILARITY 3. P 2) PRIMARY ANALOGUES 1, 2, and 3 also have PROPERTY. C) Therefore, SECONDARY ANALOGUE has PROPERTY as well.

AND MAYBE THE SPEAKER’S NOT CERTAIN IN THEIR CONCLUSION… P 1) SECONDARY ANALOGUE is like PRIMARY ANALOGUE 1, PRIMARY ANALOGUE 2, and PRIMARY ANALOGUE 3 in that they all share SIMILARITY 1, SIMILARITY 2, and SIMILARITY 3. P 2) PRIMARY ANALOGUES 1, 2, and 3 also have PROPERTY. C) Therefore, SECONDARY ANALOGUE probably has PROPERTY as well.

EXAMPLE “The government has no right to prohibit drug use. Just like overeating, or having promiscuous sex, being responsible is a matter of using your willpower. The government has no right to stop us from overeating or from having lots of sex, so why does it get to tell us we can’t use drugs? ” We can reconstruct this…

EXAMPLE P 1) DRUG USE is like OVEREATING and PROMISCUOUS SEX in that they are MATTERS OF BEHAVIOR CONTROL. P 2) OVEREATING and PROMISCUOUS SEX are also both THINGS THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING. C) Therefore, DRUG USE is a THING THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING as well. Here’s another way we could reconstruct this…

EXAMPLE P 1) OVEREATING and PROMISCUOUS SEX are both MATTERS OF BEHAVIOR CONTROL, as well as being THINGS THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING. P 2) DRUG USE is also a MATTER OF BEHAVIOR CONTROL. C) Therefore, DRUG USE is also a THING THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING.

EXAMPLE P 1) OVEREATING and PROMISCUOUS SEX are both MATTERS OF BEHAVIOR CONTROL, as well as being THINGS THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING. P 2) DRUG USE is also a MATTER OF BEHAVIOR CONTROL. C) Therefore, DRUG USE is also a THING THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO STOP US FROM DOING. Overeating and promiscuous sex are primary analogues. Drug use is the secondary analogue. The two activities are similar in that they are supposedly matters of behavioral control. The speaker concludes that, because the primary analogues have the property of being things the government has no right to stop us from doing, the secondary analogue has that property as well.