Analyze the analogical reasoning in the following arguments. In each case:

Identify the conclusion

Identify the analogue about which a conclusion is being drawn in the proposed argument by analogy (or in the argument being criticized).

Which is the more familiar case?

Which is the less familiar case?

Is the argument in question a strong example of arguments from analogy?

What do the cases have in common?

How do the cases differ?

Are the commonalities sufficient to justify the conclusion, even given the differences?

1. From Science News,

The concept of “vintage year” took on a new meaning this week when two scientists presented the first chemical evidence that wine existed as far back as about 3500 BC. They had noticed a red stain while piecing together jars excavated from an Iranian site. They compared the stain with a similar stain in an ancient Egyptian vessel known to have contained wine. The researchers scraped the reddish residue from the jars and analyzed the samples with infrared spectroscopy. Residues from the Iranian and Egyptian jars looked alike and were full of tartaric acid, a chemical naturally abundant only in grapes. “Those crystals are a signature for wine,” says one researcher.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The conclusion is that wine existed as far back as about 3500 BC The analogue about which a conclusi... View the full answer