Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scribble" data-source="post: 5540000" data-attributes="member: 23977">KM-Once again it's not the use of analogy that's jarring, or what Aegeri or myself take issue with- it's the use of hyperbole.Before you post yet another link, maybe take a moment to think about what the links say?The idea of an analogy is essentially so that someone that knows absolutely nothing of one concept can use their understanding of a second concept to better understand the first.Take the analogy you just posted: Time flows like a river.What we know about a river:A river moves in one direction.A river won't suddenly start flowing backwards.A river's course is hard if not impossible to divert with normal actionsA river never actually stops.From this someone that knows nothing about our perception of time can surmise that we perceive that time time:Flows in one direction.Won't suddenly start going backwards.cannot be diverted or stopped easily.is forever moving onward.Now let's look at your analogy:"Yeah. Murders aren't that frequent, either, so I guess we should all stop paying attention to them."You are essentially trying to get us to understand the importance of not ignoring silly sounding names by making us see the dangers of ignoring murder.You really don't see the problem with this analogy?Murders end livesMurders alter the non ended lives foreverTheres no correcting a murderMurder feels contrary to the very fiber of all rational human beingsSomeone who knows absolutely nothing about D&D would get a pretty crazy idea about the dangers silly sounding names impose by following your analogy.Silly sounding names destroy lives?They alter the lives around us forever?There's no correcting silly sounding names?They feel contrary to the very fiber of our existence?Sure- both of them might happen infrequently but because that one descriptor is such a small part of what murder as a whole is it causes a faulty analogy.It's akin to if I were to try to talk to someone about puppies by using an analogy about child molesters because both of them like kids. It just won't work- The listener is going to end up with a REALLY distorted view of puppies.By using them in the analogy the way you did I'm forced to either believe:1. You used a bad analogy.We call you on it (it happens to everyone at some point) and then we move on.Faulty analogies are kind of a staple of comedy. 2. You are using hyperbole in order to "trick" your audience into seeing the dangers of ignoring your argument.Everyone tends to overstate their position when debating. The problem lies when you go to far (ie Hyperbole) it tends to back fire.Now instead of heightening the awareness of your argument, you're heightening awareness of it being unsound, and making it appear somewhat comical. (Faulty analogies being a staple of comedy.)Again we call you on it, and then we move on.OR:3.  You honestly DO believe the relationship of the two, and are therefore a non rational human being.If this is the case I'm not sure if we can really continue to discuss things with you.I'm thinking personally that you just tend to veer towards hyperbole and faulty analogies (like equating a company selling collectible cards to someone selling crack to little kids...) I hope at least.</blockquote>

Verification