ANALOG METHOD: CHARACTERISTICS AND EXAMPLES - CULTURE VOCABULARY - 2025

The analogical method is a reasoning process that is based on the association capacity of the mind. This process consists of taking a past experience and comparing it with a current experience, to reach conclusions about the current experience based on other experiences that have already occurred.

It is a method widely used in everyday arguments, but it is also a fundamental tool in the professional field. In particular, the analogical method is widely used in court by lawyers seeking to convince the jury and judge of their case.

Visual example of an analogy

Simply defined, the analog method is to reach a conclusion by comparing two items. Given its comparative nature, it is considered exclusive of the logical reasoning method. However, the logical method also requires some degree of comparison, though not to the extreme of analog.

It is crucial that both things being compared have high similarities; the more similarities the two things share compared, the more valid the argument tends to be in the mind of the listener.

characteristics

Comparisons

As he defines his theory, an analogy consists of comparing two things and trying to find their similarities, so that one explains the other. That is to say, in the analogical method, we look for something similar to what we want to explain in order to be able to compare both and define the first one more clearly.

For example, if argument A is similar to argument X, argument A can be used to explain X. That is the basic characteristic that defines the analog method.

Applications

The comparability afforded by the analogue method makes it a fundamental tool for developing arguments.

An analogy can be used to explain an unknown concept using concepts or previous experiences as a frame of reference, to facilitate understanding of the new concept.

The analogical method can be used to explain new concepts, or to reach new conclusions in a particular case.

However, one of its most important uses is the ability to convince by association. Using an analogue argument allows a person to argue using a concept that they are already familiar with. This allows you to present better ideas when trying to convince another person of what you believe.

Arguments that use the analogue method are considered a good way to get people to change their minds about the topic of the argument.

Criteria

The analog method must meet a number of criteria to be valid. The relevance of the two things being compared is one of the most important; You cannot compare two things simply because they are similar, it is important that they are related to each other and are similar in more than one respect.

Two other crucial criteria in developing an analogical argument are differences and similarities. It is important to evaluate what are the similarities between two things to contrast them with their differences. In this way, it is possible to obtain better reasoning points when presenting the argument.

Similarities and relevance go hand in hand in the development of these types of arguments. For example, you are likely to win an argument if you want to explain how dangerous a lion is compared to a tiger.

On the other hand, if one seeks to compare the possibility of deaths caused by reckless drivers with the number of deaths caused by firearms, it is likely that the argument will be dismissed as invalid.

The more similar the concepts, the more robust the analogy that is generated to create the argument.

Error range

The main disadvantage of using this argument is the capacity for error that people who use the analogue method have. The big problem with comparisons is that they don't always have logical principles.

While the comparison may appear valid at first glance (and may even be enough to win the argument), it is likely that a mistake is being made when using this criterion.

This is because human beings are able to associate by nature and by instinct what seems correct to them, regardless of what logic dictates.

The difference of inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning is based on previous knowledge to reach the conclusion of an argument.

Simplicity

Although the analog method has a relatively wide margin of error (especially when compared to logical reasoning), it is a very good way to explain complex arguments easily.

The capacity of association allows to relate a complex situation that is sought to explain with a simple situation that has occurred previously.

This makes the analogical method one of the simplest types of human reasoning, not only to understand arguments, but also to explain them.

Examples

Scenario 1

One way to apply the analog method to explain a complex argument is when you want to understand the distance from the Earth to the Moon. For a human being it is difficult to deal with such great distances, because human standards are adapted to distances from Earth.

To explain this distance it is possible to use an analogy. For example, it can be said that from the Earth to the Moon it is possible to place all the planets of the Solar System, one next to the other.

In this way, the explanation is simplified and it is much easier to understand than saying the exact number of kilometers, which would be around 384,000.

Scenario 2

When you want to explain how pain feels to a person who has never suffered it, the best way to do it is by means of an analogy.

For example, if a person is suffering from a kidney stone and wants to explain how they feel to another non-convalescent person, an analogy can be used to do so.

If the person suffering from pain tells the other person that "it hurts like giving birth to a baby", the person will have a frame of reference to assess the pain and better understand the explanation.

References

1. Analogical Reasoning Research Paper, JF Sowa and AK Majumdar, 2003. Taken from jfsowa.com
2. Reasoning By Analogy: Definition & Examples, T. Frank, 2018. Taken from study.com
3. Reasoning and Problem Solving: Models; AK Barbey, LW Barsalou in Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, 2009. Taken from sciencedirect.com
4. Analogy and Analogical Reasoning, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2013. From Stanford.edu
5. Analogical Reasoning, D. & Smith, L., 2012. From northwestern.edu