Sociological Argument

Analogical Argument

2. Analogue: doctors and lawyers Primary Subject: travel agents Similarity: jobs that give public service with years of training Property: must also give the most safety and comfort in service Although there are many relevant similarities between the analogue and the primary subject (e.g. jobs that give public service with years of training), they are outweighed by the relevant dissimilarities, most important of which is the difference in the level of training and responsibilities. Doctors and lawyers get more years of deeper, more intense and more scientific level of training than travel agents. This is because they also hold greater responsibilities than travel agent, most important of which involve cases of
the lives and deaths of many people. They also hold information that, unlike travel agents, regular people cannot have access to. With more knowledge, people will find lawyers and doctors more reliable and people will find safety and comfort in them. Therefore, this analogical argument is weak. 3. Analogue: library Primary Subject: video games arcade Similarity: both are indoor public places where one does the same thing Property: should result in narrow-mindedness for anyone who spends time in it Although there is a relevant similarity between the analogue and the primary subject (e.g. both are indoor places where one can only do one thing), it is outweighed by the relevant dissimilarities, most important of which are the results of doing the one activity that can be done in each place. Playing games at a video arcade would not give one the knowledge required to make him or her see things and issues in various points of views while reading in the library would. In other words, doing one thing in video arcade would not support one to be more open minded while doing one thing in the library would. Therefore, this is a weak analogical argument.
4. Analogue: Stealing money from the company Primary Subject: Being lazy at work Similarity: both are creating loss for the company Property: should be fired Although there are many relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g. they both are creating loss for the company), they are overweighed by the relevant dissimilarities. Stealing money from the company is a crime, crossing the law, and it has a concrete mean. However, being lazy at work does not necessarily mean breaking a written rule and laziness has some relative meaning. A person being productive by doing thinking might be seen as laziness by another person. Unlike stealing money, being lazy might not be done in the purpose of disadvantaging the company. Therefore, it is a weak analogical argument.
5. Analogue: Driving a car Primary Subject: Having children Similarity: both requires high responsibilities Property: should go through classes and tests to be allowed Although there are many relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g. they both hold good deal of responsibilities), they are outweighed by the relevant difference, most important of which is the different kinds of skill and responsibilities needed to accomplish the tasks of driving a car and having children. In driving a car, a person needs to acquire skills that are uniformed in society, such as following traffic signs, while having children is mostly depending on maternal instincts and the various parental beliefs. We cannot argue with the rules of driving safely as traffic experts and government settle them, whereas we can have children and grow them with values that we believe are the best. Also, the responsibility for driving a car is merely about the safety in the moment of driving that can be learned from a book of rules while the responsibility for having children involves lifetime complex issues that have no concrete laws that can be learned in a class. Therefore, this is a weak analogical argument.

6. Analogue: family Primary Subject: college Similarity: both are the foundation of children’s education and future Property: should not pay tuition to belong Although there are few relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g.
they are the foundation of children’s education and future), there are more relevant dissimilarities, most important of which is the different basis that build and hold family and college. Family is built on the basis of blood relations, or, in special cases, it is mainly relationships in domestic life and financial dependence, with the emotional relations that come with it. On the other hand, college is built on primarily society’s financial basis and a large part is already paid through the government’s funding, collected from taxes. In other words, while family is built on relationships and emotions, college is built on money, which explains why we should pay for college and not for family. Therefore, the analogical argument is
weak.

7. Analogue: me Primary Subject: him Similarity: both are human, having the same nervous system Property: should have the same pain when had a tooth extracted without an anesthetic There are many more relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue, the most important of which is having the same nervous system, than the relevant dissimilarities (e.g. the difference in gene that effects one’s nervous sensitivity). It is relevant to assume that ‘him’ is someone who does not have any nervous disorder, as having normal nervous system would be the much bigger probability. Also, we can claim that ‘him’ and ‘me’ as both human beings, since only human beings go to the dentists and get tooth extractions. So, this is a good analogical argument.

8. Analogue: dentists and doctors Primary Subject: the person behind the counter at coffee shops Similarity: both are jobs that deal with public service Property: should not get tips from costumers Although there are many relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g. they are both jobs that deal with public service), they are outweighed by the relevant dissimilarities, one of which is the salary. Dentists and doctors make much more income than the people work at a coffee shop. Also, the costumers pay much less for coffee than they do for dentists and doctors. Paying a coffee shop worker a bit extra—of a percentage of the coffee price—would matter much for the worker with only little cost for the costumer. However, paying a tip for a doctor or a dentist would not mean much for them and yet the costumers have already paid a lot of money for the service. Therefore, this is a weak analogical argument.

9. Analogue: risks of death or serious injury Primary Subject: steroids Similarity: both are the down and dangerous side of the athlete world Property: should be treated only as parts of sports—nothing wrong with it Although there are relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g.
they are both the down and dangerous side of the athlete world), they are outweighed by the relevant dissimilarities, most important of which is about the matter of choice and control. Steroid is an option that an athlete can have control on, while deaths and serious injuries are not options and often uncontrollable. So, taking steroids also could mean endangering the athlete on purpose while the risks of accidents that cause injuries and death are not. Also, taking steroids may mean a faster way of winning, where at some level might be considered cheating. However, taking the risk of death and serious injuries in sports is absolutely not cheating. Therefore, this is a weak argument. 10. Analogue: singing someone else’s song Primary Subject: plagiarism (downloading papers from the internet) Similarity: both are about using someone else’s creation Property: should be taken as lightly Although there are relevant similarities between the primary subject and the analogue (e.g. they are both about using someone else’s creation), they are outweighed by the relevant dissimilarities, most important of which is about the claiming of ownership. Singing someone else’s song is not claiming that song as one’s own, while downloading papers from the Internet is the same as claiming that the papers are one’s creations. In other words, singing someone else’s song is not exactly plagiarism and
downloading papers from the Internet is. Therefore, this is a weak analogical argument.