Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5537848" data-attributes="member: 2067">As that dictionary link points out, an analogy is not an equation, it's a <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/comparison" target="_blank">comparison </a> of one specific aspect. Conflating a comparison with an equation will lead you to all sorts of logical problems, since no analogy has a true 1:1 relationship with the things being compared. For instance, "Time flows like a river to the sea" is a common analogy (really, a simile, but that's mostly semantics, and the distinction is irrelevant for my purposes here). But time is not wet, cannot be swum, is not potable, has no "sea" destination, etc. Similarly, in my analogy, murder is a fairly rare (but existant) event, as is, by the OP's criteria, CompoundWord monsters. However, the OP's logic would dictate that rare events should not be a problem for an individual because of their rarity. By postulating an event that is rare, but still a problem, I endeavored to show the absurdity of the logic employed. The degree of hyperbole is debatable, as there are events that are rarer (say, the heat death of the universe?) that I could have employed had I wished to make dramatic use of hyperbole. It would have been difficult to show the absurdity of the OP's logic without employing an absurd conclusion, so of course a casual observer would have to see that the conclusion is absurd. A dramatic event serves thus as a rhetorical device, representing the absurdity of the OP's logic emotionally.If you don't fully understand the concept, I understand, which is why I endeavor to explain it. A new concept such as analogy can be something that is difficult to casually grasp, especially when employed on a medium without context or relation. However, I think it's pretty important to understand, especially if you hope to have constructive conversation, so I hope you find the information useful, and we can resume a constructive conversation around the OP's topic.So, to reiterate, I feel that the OP is wrong when he (or she) assumes that because CompoundWord Monsters are rare, and thus should not be a problem. Rare things can still be problematic, even catastrophic, things. The problem lies within the thing itself, and not within its frequency. To argue that rarity should dictate the level of problem is absurd. Thus, I find the OP's initial point to be invalid, and dispute the conclusions he or she comes to based on those initial points.I hope you can see that, now.</blockquote>

Verification