When I was studying philosophy with that great and good man T. Y. Henderson, he taught his young disciples the dangers of argument by analogy. He showed us a column by another great and good man, Billy Graham, who asserted that just as to drive a car one had to have a driver's license, so in order to enjoy carnal pleasures one ought to have a marriage license. Could anyone see a flaw in this argument, asked T.Y. Even the most doltish among us could: in order to win a driver's license one had to demonstrate a proficiency that was born of considerable practice. Was Graham advocating a learner's permit for sex? Hours of repetition of skills guided by a watchful parent? Surely not; ergo, be careful with those analogies, kids.
If one were to examine the argumentum per analogiam of Victor Davis Hanson one might immediately perceive that he had turned the current situation in the Middle East upside down. The South Atlantic episode of 1982 saw a small, barren territory populated by a small, backward people invaded by a foreign power wielding considerable military might, using as justification for their take-over irredentist claims from another century. It sounds like a perfect anology to me -- if we reverse Hanson's dramatis personae and equate Israel with the Argies and the Palestinians of the West Bank with the Falklanders. Who plays Margaret Thatcher is anyone's guess.
Hanson's logical clumsiness seems, to these aged eyes at least, an excellent example of argumentam ad crumenam.
Posted by at May 17, 2003 07:22 PM