One area that I found to be interesting and helpful in chapter 12 was the judging analogies. Epstein mentions that in order to use an analogy is must be clearly stated, otherwise often times one side of the analogy can be too vague to use. I agree with this and often times find it hard to understand why somebody would use a specific analogy when trying to make their point or in order to prove someone wrong. I liked the first example that Epstein used, talking about Magic Johnson and HIV. At first the statement is hard to understand or follow and I would have to guess at why they decided to compare the military to an NBA star. However once they begin to explain the basis of the argument it makes sense and shows how you can use analogies but often times need to show the premises in order to people to completely understand what it is you are trying to tell them.
I also found what you found to be interesting. It is funny how such random things bring interest to us. I like how you explained the Magic Johnson part of the chapter as it was a little hard to follow. But now that you explained it in your blog, it definitely makes much more sense now. I agree that using analogies vaguely in an argument is hard to use because it can be hard to understand. I feel we sometimes overuse analogies because they can be such an easy way for us to argue, but, they sort of make for a lazy argument.
ReplyDelete