3 ms·
When you’re making an analogy, you get to choose which aspects of the metaphor are relevant. For example, are you aware that when launching a rocket, you want
by jameshart 4y ago
When you’re making an analogy, you get to choose which aspects of the metaphor are relevant.
For example, are you aware that when launching a rocket, you want to avoid wasting fuel by going to full throttle in the thick, lower part of the atmosphere, where you’ll waste a lot of the energy you gain to air resistance?
There’s a reason one of the checkpoints in a space shuttle launch sequence was “go for throttle up”.
So even if you wanted to talk about economic management as being like ‘launching a rocket’ you could still make an argument for leaving some power in reserve for when the going gets easier.
- kortilla 4y agoBut why is any of it relevant? When you create if you’re supposed to explain why the analogy/metaphor is apt first. You use them to drive a point home, not to make the point in the first place. > are you aware that when launching a rocket, you want to avoid wasting fuel by going to full throttle in the thick, lower part of the atmosphere, where you’ll waste a lot of the energy you gain to air resistance? Yes, you’re referring to “max Q”. It’s still a completely different comparison though because you only have those events early on and then you go full throttle until you hit your first stage goal.
- jameshart 4y agoThe point is that the parts of the analogy that are relevant are the parts the person using it for explanatory effect chooses. They’re not proposing an isomorphism, they are making a comparison to motivate you to modify your thinking.