Analogy

The argument per analogy is one of the arguments in litigation. The problem is that similar phenomena may differ in some respects in other respects. However, there is no clear criterion by which we can decide whether a given consideration, according to which we compare something, is a well-chosen relation. In other words, there are no clear RULES according to which we are to establish a SELECTION CRITERION for THE CRITERION OF COMPARISON (ANALOGY). In biology lessons, we learned the structure and operation of different systems: respiratory system, skeletal system, circulatory system. Then we compared SYSTEMS WITH THE SAME FUNCTION in mammals and birds, and so on.

However, we did not compare systems with different functions: cardiovascular and skeletal. In law science, the sections of law with different functions are compared: civil law with administrative law. Does it make sense? But in biology, the structure of different tissues is compared: bone tissue is compared with skin tissue, and muscle tissue with blood tissue, etc. The examples given show a bit about the problem with determining the SELECTION CRITERION for THE COMPARISON CRITERION. Does analogy lead to something useful, or rather it can lead us nowhere.

All science is based on comparison. Metaphors too. This is the ins and outs of useless criteria.