Definition:
A fallacy in which an argument is based on misleading, superficial, or implausible comparisons. See also:
Examples and Observations
- "There are seven windows given to animals in the domicile of the head: two nostrils, two eyes, two ears, and a mouth. . . . From this and many other similarities in Nature, too tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of planets must necessarily be seven."
(Francesco Sizzi, 17th-century Italian astronomer) - "We are living in the age of the false, and often shameless, analogy. A slick advertising campaign compares the politicians working to dismantle Social Security to Franklin D. Roosevelt. In a new documentary, Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Kenneth Lay compares attacks on his company to the terrorist attacks on the United States.
"Intentionally misleading comparisons are becoming the dominant mode of public discourse. . . .
"The power of an analogy is that it can persuade people to transfer the feeling of certainty they have about one subject to another subject about which they may not have formed an opinion. But analogies are often undependable. Their weakness is that they rely on the dubious principle that, as one logic textbook puts it, 'because two things are similar in some respects they are similar in some other respects.' An error-producing 'fallacy of weak analogy' results when relevant differences outweigh relevant similarities."
(Adam Cohen, "An SAT Without Analogies Is Like: (A) A Confused Citizenry . . .." The New York Times, March 13, 2005)
Also Known As: faulty analogy, weak analogy
