In another thread we've seen dozens of posts about whether arguments from analogy are valid, sound, and persuasive. Since none of those posts were on topic, I'm opening up the discussion here.
I, for one, welcome analogical arguments, so long as they are truly analogous at certain crucial points which (alas!) vary depending on the topic to hand. I found J.J. Thompson's violinist analogy remarkably compelling at a time in my life when I wasn't particularly inclined to adopt her position, in part because she made key concessions in her thought experiment.
That said, just as most writers can't do satire like The Onion, most thinkers cannot do analogy like Thompson.
Thoughts?
I, for one, welcome analogical arguments, so long as they are truly analogous at certain crucial points which (alas!) vary depending on the topic to hand. I found J.J. Thompson's violinist analogy remarkably compelling at a time in my life when I wasn't particularly inclined to adopt her position, in part because she made key concessions in her thought experiment.
That said, just as most writers can't do satire like The Onion, most thinkers cannot do analogy like Thompson.
Thoughts?
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/32KH7bY
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire