Analogical arguments claim that a conclusion is probable based on similarities between two or more things. To evaluate the strength of an analogical argument, six criteria are used: 1) the number of similar entities or cases in the premises, 2) the variety of those cases, 3) the number of similar respects between the cases, 4) the relevance of those respects, 5) any dissimilarities between the cases, and 6) how modest the conclusion's claim is based on the premises. Arguments are stronger when they have more entities, a variety of cases, many relevant similar respects, few dissimilarities, and more modest conclusions.

1. Topic: Appraising analogical
argument.
Subject: logic and reasoning.
Teacher: sir. Ghazanfar Ali
Submitted by: Mansoor BuNnY Sana Malik
and Madiah batool.
Roll numbers: 641
and 642.
Bs education forth regular.

2. Appraising analogical
argument

3. What is an argument?
Argument: Argument is a group of
two or more than two statements
(preposition) that express an
inference.

4. What is an analogical
argument.
Argument by analogy: In an
argument by analogy a conclusion is
claimed to depend on analogy (a
comparison or similarity) between two
or more than two things.

5. Example: Humans can move about,
solve mathematical equations, win
chess games, and feel pain.
Androids are like humans in that they
can move about, solve math
equations, and win chess games.
Thus, it’s probable that Androids too
can feel pain.

6. Appraising Analogical
Arguments: Some analogical arguments are
much more cogent than others. Although no argument
by analogy can be deductively valid, some such
arguments yield conclusions that are very probably
true, whereas others are very weak indeed. Analogical
arguments are evaluated as better or worse depending
on the degree of probability with which, relying on the
premises they put forward, their conclusions may be
affirmed.

7. Example: Suppose you choose to
purchase a given pair of shoes because
other pairs like it have given you
satisfaction in the past In this case,
analogical arguments have been relied
on. To appraise the strength of their
sample arguments, and indeed all
analogical arguments, six criteria may be
distinguished.

8. Criteri
a1. Number of
entities2. Variety of the instances in the
premises.3.Number of similar
respects:4.Relevance:
5.Disanalogies.
6.Claim that the conclusion

9. Number of entities:
the larger the number of
entities—that is, cases in our past
experience—the stronger the
argument.

10. Example
:
Having the example of shoes:
if I have repeatedly purchased shoes just like
those, I may reasonably suppose that the next
pair will be as good as the ones worn earlier.
Several experiences of the same kind with an
item of just that sort will support the
conclusion—that the purchase will be satisfying—
much more than will a single instance

11. Example cont……
Each instance may be thought of as an
additional entity, and the number of entities
is the first criterion in evaluating an
analogical argument.

12. Variety of the instances in the
premises.
The more dissimilar the instances
mentioned only in the premises of the
analogical argument, the stronger is
the argument.

13. Example:
If my previous purchases of those good
shoes had been from both a department
store and a specialty store, and had been
made both in New York and in California, by
both mail order and direct sale, I may be
confident that it is the shoes them-selves
and not their seller that accounts for my
satisfaction

14. Number of similar respects:
The greater the number of respects in
which the entity in the conclusion is
similar to the entities in the premises,
the more probable is that conclusion.

15. Example:
Among the instances in the premises there may
have been various similarities: perhaps the shoes
were of the same style, had the same price,
were made of the same sort of leather, and also
like the instance in the conclusion, increase the
probability that the instance in the conclusion
will have that further attribute at which the
argument is aimed—giving great satisfaction in

16. Relevance:
One attribute is relevant to another when
it is connected to that other, when there
is some kind of causal relation between
them.
Respects add to the force of the
argument when they are relevant.

17. Example:
As important as the number of respects shared is
the kind of respects in which the instances in the
premises are like the instance in the conclusion.
If the new pair of shoes, like the previous pairs, is
purchased on a Tuesday that is a likeness that will
have no bearing on the satisfaction they give; but
if the new pair, like all the previous pairs, had
the same manufacturer, that will count heavily.

18. Disanalogie
s:A disanalogy is a point of difference, a
respect in which the case we are reasoning
about in our conclusion is distinguishable
from the cases on which the argument is
based.
Or
In analogical argument a point of difference

19. Example:
Returning to the example of the shoes, if the pair we plan to
buy looks like those we had owned earlier, but is in fact much
cheaper and made by a different company, those disanalogies
will give us reason to doubt the satisfaction they will provide.
Disanalogies weaken analogical arguments. They are therefore
commonly employed in attacking an analogical argument. As
critics, we may try to show that the case in the conclusion is
different in important ways from the earlier cases, and that
what was true of them is not likely to be true of the present
case.

20. Claim that the conclusion
makes:Every argument makes the claim that its premises
give reasons to accept its conclusion. It is easy to
see that the more one claims, the greater the
burden of sustaining that claim, and that is
obviously true for every analogical argument. The
modesty of the conclusion relative to the premises
is critical in determining the merit of the
inference.

21. Continue……
In general, the more modest the claim, the
less burden is placed on the premises and
the stronger the argument; the bolder the
claim, the greater is the burden on the
premises and the weaker the argument.

22. Example
If my friend gets 30 miles to the gallon from his
new car, I may infer that, were I to acquire a car of
the same make and model, I would get at least 20
miles to the gallon; that conclusion is modest and
therefore very probable. Were my conclusion much
bolder—say, that I would get at least 29 miles to
the gallon—it would be less well supported by the

23. Continue…….
An analogical argument is strengthened by reducing
the claim made on the basis of the premises
affirmed, or by retaining the claim unchanged while
supporting it with additional or more powerful
premises. Likewise, an analogical argument is
weakened if its conclusion is made bolder while its
premises remain unchanged, or if the claim remains
unchanged while the evidence in its support is

24. Thank you so much Respected
sir and dear class fellow.
I hope you all get a rouhly
idea of the topic which I have
presented.