Discussion Question #23

For the last discussion post of the week, I'm going to focus on refuting arguments by use of an analogy. While the book states that using analogies in a single argument is usually too vague to use as a premise, using an analogy between two arguments is a very powerful way to refute. The book uses a great example by discussing the issue of homosexuality. In it, "Tom" refers to homosexual marriage threatens the sanctity of marriage and there should be an amendment preventing it. "Zoe" then responds with an analogy showing how Britney Spears is also ruining the sanctity of marriage by marrying/divorcing in one-day and that divorce should be outlawed also. Some people, certainly on a subject like this, can be close-minded and/or ignorant at times, but using a method like this will make that close-minded/ignorant individual see both sides of the argument. Using an analogy of one argument to another easily points out the flaws in a persons argument, just like Zoe showed Tom how ridiculous his argument was.