Argumentative Strategy:
Analogy
 
Introduction
 
Analogy refers to a relationship of similarities between two subjects. The likening of a known subject or event to an unfamiliar one, facilitates understanding of the new subject or the formulation of an opinion or attitude towards the new subject. Analogy is a commonly used strategy in support of a claim in argument.
 
Basic Analogy: A is similar to B
 
Example:

I have been following the Harry Potter series since the first volume. The first six volumes have been fantastic. I am sure this final book is going to be as enjoyable as the previous volumes.
 
Main Argument:
I am sure this final book is going to be as enjoyable as the previous volumes.
 
In this argument, we have Harry Potter vols. 1-6 and the final volume as objects for comparison. The analogy is used based on similar qualities all seven books supposedly have in common as they belong to the same series. By invoking the shared features, we can say that the first six volumes and the final volume are relevantly similar.
 
Reasoning by Precedent
 
We can see that the analogy is based on the writer’s past experience of reading the first six volumes of the Harry Potter series. By inductive reasoning, the writer comes to the conclusion that the final volume will be as enjoyable as the previous six.
 
Analogy by precedent:
Because
(from the experience of reading the first six books, I found that) the first six volumes of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series have been fantastic
(and)
the final book of the Harry Potter series, is also written by J.K. Rowling
therefore
(inductively)
I am sure this final book is going to be as enjoyable as the previous volumes.
 
Beware of Relevant Differences
 
The final volume of Harry Potter may be different from the previous six, for example, in terms of the plot and the characters. Without making clear to the audience the target properties of comparison, the writer may be misleading the reader to expect more similarities than are warranted. The argument by analogy can be refuted as follows:
 

“The final volume is different. The story comes to an end and some major characters will die. Bearing this and other factors in mind, there is no way we can be sure that ‘this final book is going to be enjoyable in the same way as the previous ones’.”

 
To make the argument valid, we need to substantiate our analogy by explicating the relevant similarities and supporting them with evidence.
 
Substantiating an analogy
 
To avoid any point of ambiguity, we have to clarify the target properties that we take into account in the comparison. Such properties are shared by both objects of comparison, and are central to the effectiveness of the main argument. The terms of comparison in the analogy have been highlighted for your attention.
 

I have been following the Harry Potter series since the first volume. The first six volumes have been fantastic. The bewitching characters, the whirlwind trips of the imagination and the equally enchanting twists and turns of the story have made reading the books an enjoyable experience for both children and adult readers. This final book is not going to disappoint you if you are looking for the same elements in the story.
 
Now it is clearer to the audience what the analogy is grounded on. By comparing the shared features that are relevant to the argument, the analogy becomes an effective one.
 
Note the language of negation in dealing with the possible ambiguity or objection to the analogy. For further information on the use of negation, please go to the Section on the Use of Negation.
 
Free-writing Exercise on the Use of Analogies
 
Substantiate the following analogies by elaborating on the relevant similarities. Try to identify differences between what is being compared, if any.
 
Example
 

Writing a thesis and preparing for its defence is no different from a lawyer’s constructing his legal case to be presented in the law court.

Relevant similarity:

One needs to develop a solid argument, anticipate objections and be prepared to defend or refute with adequate support and reasons.

Difference:

The first case happens in the academic arena, while the latter belongs to the legal field.

 
Suggested Argument by Analogy:
 

Writing a thesis and preparing for its defence is no different from a lawyer’s constructing his legal case to be presented in court. One needs to develop a solid argument, anticipate objections and be prepared to defend or refute with adequate support and reasons. Admittedly, a thesis defence occurs in an academic setting while a legal defence takes place in the law court, but the thoroughness of the preparation and the tension involved are actually the same.
 
Note the use of terms for making comparisons and the language for concession and rebuttal. For further information on such language use, please go to the Sections on Comparison and Contrast, and Concession and Rebuttal.
 
 

1.       The Harry Potter movies will be all the same as the Harry Potter novels.

Suggested Answer:
Similarities: Same characters, same settings, same plots etc.
Differences: Some omissions and modifications in the movies

Written Version:
The Harry Potter movies are just like the novels in many ways. They have the same characters, details of the settings, and virtually the same plots. Minor modifications and omissions have not taken away any of the authentic feelings of the fictional experience.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

2.       All the world’s a stage; and all the men and women merely players.

Suggested Answer:
Similarities: Taking up a role, playing up to each other’s expectations,                 saying the lines expected of the situations and scenes etc.
Differences: Unanticipated events, not acting according to roles

Written Version:
According to William Shakespeare, the world is a stage and all the men and women are merely players. They may think they are free agents, but are in fact playing the roles assigned to them by society. Even the lines they utter seem to be a mere repetition of conventional expectations. Such is the case, notwithstanding the seemingly unanticipated events and the illusion that we have free choices to make.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

3.       An organization operates like a machine.
Suggested Answer:
Similarities: All parts fit together for operation, every part is linked to every other                 part, the machinery needs oiling and the organization needs to be made                 smooth through effective communication and congenial interpersonal                 relationships.
Differences Members of organization are human beings, not mechanical parts. Human                 feelings and needs get into the way of smooth running of artificially                 divided up functions and departments.

Written Version:
An organization operates like a machine. The different departments are linked to each other and their smooth running depends on their mutual dependence and cooperation. Just as a machine needs to be well oiled, an organization is maintained through effective communication channels and congenial human relationships. This is particularly important as an organization is made up of human beings who cannot be neatly divided up into artificial functions and watertight departments.