Evaluate exercises 1, 14, 21, and 26 from the practice handout according to the template from

the analogical arguments handout. Your answers must be in the standard form of the
practice exercises, identifying what is being compared, what conclusion is being reached and
what similarities the conclusion relies on. Finally, propose an analogical argument of your
own, and put it into standard form as well.

1.D.H. Lawrence's novel, Women in Love, must be a masterpiece. After all, critics often charge that it
is careless and loosely constructed. But the same accusation can be made against Mark Twain's
Huckleberry Finn, and that's one of the finest pieces of American literature ever written.

Argument 1 compares D.H. Lawrence’s novel to Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn to conclude that the
novel Women in Love will be a masterpiece. Because they are similar in the fact of both being loosely
constructed.

This is a worthless argument 1 for the following reasons:

1. The sample is inadequate and not representative. The sample only accounts for one author.

2. The conclusion that D.H. Lawrence’s Novel, Women in Love with be a masterpiece is incautious. The
evidence is not there to support such a conclusion.

3. The similarities between the authors are not relevant to the conclusion. The fact that both are of
careless and loosely construction in no way indicates that the novel will be a masterpiece.

4. There are many novels in circulation today that are careless and loosely constructed that are not
masterpieces.

14. Some paintings by Picasso, previously unknown to the public, have just been discovered in Paris.
There is no question of their authenticity. Plans are in the works to exhibit them at the major
European and American galleries. I plan to view them when the exhibit comes to Kansas City, for it is
very likely that I shall enjoy these works. After all, I am acquainted with all the other works of Picasso,
works which represent an amazing variety of subjects, styles and techniques, and I have never seen a
Picasso that I did not like.

Argument 14 compares Picassos known works to his recently discovered works. To argue that the
speaker will enjoy the new Picasso paintings because they are both produced by Picasso and should be
similar.
This is a strong 5 argument for the following reasons:

1. The sample is a good one. The speaker has seen all other works of Picasso representing a variety
of subjects, styles, and techniques. The speaker enjoyed all the previously produced Picasso
paintings.
2. The conclusion fits the evidence in a reasonable way. The speaker has seen all the Picasso works
and likes all. Given the strength the sample the conclusion seems justified.
3. The fact that the speaker has seen all Picassos works and the new paintings have no question of
authenticity make the similarities relevant and numerous with no important differences.
4. Considering the information given, it would be difficult to construct an argument that the
speaker would not enjoy the new Picasso paintings.

21.If you encountered a drowning child and refused to save his life because doing so would ruin your
expensive new shoes, you would rightly be condemned as having behaved immorally. However, the
money you already spent on those expensive shoes could be used to save the live of a starving child if
it was donated to a developmental aid organization. This demonstrates that buying expensive shoes,
and in fact buying any unnecessary luxury item, is immoral. (paraphrase of Peter Singer’s argument in
Famine, Affluence and Immorality

Argument 21 compares not saving a drowning child to buying luxury items to argue that they are both
immoral. Because they both involve a luxury item that could have saved lives.

This argument is 2 weak for the following reasons.

1. The sample size biased in the direction of all luxury items being immoral. There is no evidence of
purchasing luxury shoes and amounts donated to organizations.
2. Any conclusion based on such a weak analogy is unjustified
3. The moral characteristics mentioned with not saving someone because of shoes vs the
perchance of luxury shoes is not a good basis of comparison. One deals with the morality of not
saving someone within your reach. The other argument deals with buying any luxury item being
immoral.
4. There are many well-known wealthy people that do buy expensive items and do donated
upwards of millions to aid organizations. These people would not be able to do so often without
buying expensive shoes as some are actors and need them for the trade.

26. One way to put the argument for patients’ autonomy with regard to assisted dying is to compare a
person’s life to a business: if I own a business that is making money, it makes sense to keep it open;
but if the business is losing money, would be imprudent to wait until there was no money left at all
before closing. Similarly, a terminally ill patient owns his or her body and need not “stay in business”
till the very end. (Gregory Pence, Classic Cases in Medical Ethics)

Argument #26 compares assisted dying to a business to argue that they if both are doomed then they
should be die or shutdown to prevent further loss. They are both similar in the fact that both are
consuming resources and need to stop future losses.

This is a worthless 1 argument for the following reasons

1. This is conceptual analogy

2. The evidence is not related to the subject matter. Loss of money vs loss of life are very different
and are not correlated.
3. The important difference is one deals with loss of money the other deals with loss of life. This
weakens the argument substantially.
4. Many people that have been diagnosed as terminally ill or have been given a time frame for
dying do not die. There are many factors of error in the process. As do many companies who are
almost out of money make large turnarounds.

Finally, propose an analogical argument of your own, and put it into standard form as well.

2727 My analogical argument….The USDA has laws and enforcement procedures to test chickens
from all farmers to insure the consumers safety. When I buy meat from my local grocery store, I
am confident that no harm will come to me.

Argument 2727 compares food safety to actual safety. To argue that because the USDA checks the
meat that it will be safe. Because the meat is similar regarding the USDA checking it.

The argument is strong 3 for the following reasons:

1. The argument has a large sample as the USDA reports all information on chicken safety.
2. The conclusion does fit the evidence in that all farmers are tested. So therefore, all meat should
be good from the farmer.
3. The similarity between the meat tested and meat purchased is almost identical.
4. The argument should be correct. There are variables that could take place such as the grocery
stores handling before it gets to the end user that could lead to the meat no longer being good.