Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A good analogical argument must satisfy both a prior association condition and a potential for generalization condition.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Keynes and Mill both demonstrated that analogical arguments gain force from the elimination of competing hypotheses, not from generalization conditions imposed on structural features of domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The generalization condition conflates the logic of analogical inference with the logic of inductive enumeration, treating two epistemically distinct forms of reasoning as a single schema.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Norton's material theory of induction (2003) establishes that the warrant for any inductive inference derives from local, domain-specific facts rather than formal conditions imposed across domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hesse's (1966) material theory of analogy shows that horizontal relations of resemblance alone can license analogical inference without requiring vertical causal associations in the source domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If resemblance between domains is sufficiently robust and multi-dimensional, the prior association condition is epistemically redundant rather than necessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.There must be a clear connection in the source domain between the known similarities (positive analogy) and the further similarity projected to hold in the target domain (hypothetical analogy).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There must be reason to think that the same kind of connection could obtain in the target domain, and specifically there must be no critical disanalogy between the domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.