Read on Twitter
Quarantine boredom thread #2: Analogies
*What is an analogy?
*Why arguments from analogies make for weak arguments?
*Why do analogies especially fail in philosophy of religion?
*What is an analogy?
*Why arguments from analogies make for weak arguments?
*Why do analogies especially fail in philosophy of religion?
A quick google search defines an analogy as: "a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification." So why are analogies so bad to use in a serious argument? 2/n
The answer lies in the fundamental concept of an analogy; an analogy is, by definition, limited. Therefore, an argument from analogy relies on the inherent similarity between the things that are being 'analogized'! 3/n
All one has to do to refute such an argument is to meticulously parse all the ways in which the two things being analogized aren't 'similar' (an example will follow). When shown the inherent dissimilarity then, the comparison between the two things falls apart. 4/n
In Phil of religion, the 'argument from design' or the 'teleological argument' for the existence of God falls victim to this sort of critical analysis. 5/n
In a very basic nut shell, the argument is: humans use thought to create/design orderly things---> the universe in general shows order/design---> therefore, the universe must have a supreme designer/creator. 6/n
In this analogy, two things are being compared: the product of human craft/contrivance with the product of supreme design/contrivance. But... 7/n
*Is origins of the universe similar to coming of the human tools ex: a chair?
* Why should we assume the origins of the universe began with thought just because our projects begin with thought?
*btw, our projects are imperfect, must that apply to universe too then? 8/n
* Why should we assume the origins of the universe began with thought just because our projects begin with thought?
*btw, our projects are imperfect, must that apply to universe too then? 8/n
David Hume raised these phenomenal rebuttals to the argument from design in his "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion." He wrote:... 9/n
"But can you think...that your usual phlegm and philosophy have been preserved in so wide a step as you have taken when you compared to the universe houses, ships, furniture, machines, and, from their similarity in some circumstances, inferred a similarity in their causes?" 10/n
"But can a conclusion, with any propriety, be transferred from parts to the whole?"
"And will any man tell me with a serious countenance that an orderly universe must arise from some thought and art like the human because we have experience of it?... 11/n
"And will any man tell me with a serious countenance that an orderly universe must arise from some thought and art like the human because we have experience of it?... 11/n
To ascertain this reasoning it were requisite that we had experience of the origin of worlds; and it is not sufficient, surely, that we have seen ships and cities arise from human art and contrivance." 12/n
Hume, alone, shattered the feeble analogy that the proponents of teleological argument invented and thereby, cancelled the existence of God! Perioddddtt. jk. 13/n
Hopefully, this thread was a little informative in regards to shedding light on why arguments from analogies often fail to do the job they're intended to do. 14/14
