Analogies and metaphors might be usable in conflicts, but I think they are overused in the internet. They can help explain things. It is sometimes the case tha

Analogies and metaphors might be usable in conflicts, but I think they are overused in the internet. They can help explain things. It is sometimes the case that two people disagree because each doesn’t understand what the other is saying. They are misinterpreting each other, and a better explanation can clear that up. But more often people just disagree. They understand each other, but disagree. Because the problem isn’t understanding, analogies and metaphors don’t help. Best case people just end up arguing about the analogy, as the best thing it could be is a good proxy for the actual thing, which is what they actually disagree about. Worst case, the analogy or metaphor is constructed to cast one side of the argument as obviously evil or disgusting. This is really just an ad-hom with extra steps, and it just ruins all hope of further conversation Making an analogy or metaphor in this manner is essentially taking a new topic, murdering it, and dressing up the old topic in a crude skin-suit impersonation of it. It never quite fits, different aspects end up strangely twisted and stretched, and it all ends up haphazardly stitched together. Of course this is an obviously evil thing to do, on top of not really being all that convincing. Don’t be a topic-murderer. Don’t “Buffalo Bill” the conversation. Don’t make metaphors and analogies where they aren’t useful.