4 ms·

That's a good rule. People on this site often make arguments using analogies, and those threads always devolve into arguments about the specifics of the analogy

That's a good rule. People on this site often make arguments using analogies, and those threads always devolve into arguments about the specifics of the analogy. I have an amazing screenshot I saved where the discussion turns into something about companies hiring clowns to yell at patrons. It's unintentionally comical. The participants are intelligent adults, talking about a domain that they all share some understanding of, yet the crux of their debate is the behavior of some obnoxious clowns.

iechoz6H 5y ago
Ultimately every debate boils down to the behaviour of some obnoxious clowns; it is analogous to, say, entropy.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> People on this site often make arguments using analogies, and those threads always devolve into arguments about the specifics of the analogy. That is because analogies are only useful for illustration, not as a chain of reasoning to prove something. Conversations almost universally become low quality once analogies are brought in. They should be used sparingly, and explicitly only for the purpose of illustrating an idea.
- jobe_br 5y ago
  Software development is like building a house …
TillE 5y ago
It's so common to see people arguing with an analogy, which should be obviously pointless. Proposing an alternate analogy is slightly better, but really you should just discuss the actual issue in front of you, it's much clearer.
- TrevorJ 5y ago
  I think analogy is useful in an argument for a few reasons: 1. It can reduce the problem space to the factors which the parties see as important. 2. It can uncover differences of opinion as to which factors are deemed important to the problem space. ie: "yeah, but your analogy discounts x!". Of course, analogies can be used in bad faith as rhetorical tools to win an argument on grounds other than it's merits, and that is the real problem with them.

iechoz6H 5y ago

Ultimately every debate boils down to the behaviour of some obnoxious clowns; it is analogous to, say, entropy.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> People on this site often make arguments using analogies, and those threads always devolve into arguments about the specifics of the analogy. That is because analogies are only useful for illustration, not as a chain of reasoning to prove something. Conversations almost universally become low quality once analogies are brought in. They should be used sparingly, and explicitly only for the purpose of illustrating an idea.

jobe_br 5y ago
Software development is like building a house …

TillE 5y ago

It's so common to see people arguing with an analogy, which should be obviously pointless. Proposing an alternate analogy is slightly better, but really you should just discuss the actual issue in front of you, it's much clearer.

TrevorJ 5y ago
I think analogy is useful in an argument for a few reasons: 1. It can reduce the problem space to the factors which the parties see as important. 2. It can uncover differences of opinion as to which factors are deemed important to the problem space. ie: "yeah, but your analogy discounts x!". Of course, analogies can be used in bad faith as rhetorical tools to win an argument on grounds other than it's merits, and that is the real problem with them.