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 & #39;analogized& #39;! 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& #39;t & #39;similar& #39; (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 & #39;argument from design& #39; or the & #39;teleological argument& #39; 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& #39;re intended to do. 14/14
