analogy analysis essay topics

30 Writing Topics: Analogy

Ideas for a Paragraph, Essay, or Speech Developed With Analogies

JGI / Getty Images

An Introduction to Punctuation
Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
B.A., English, State University of New York

An analogy is a kind of comparison that explains the unknown in terms of the known, the unfamiliar in terms of the familiar.

A good analogy can help your readers understand a complicated subject or view a common experience in a new way. Analogies can be used with other methods of development to explain a process , define a concept, narrate an event, or describe a person or place.

Analogy isn't a single form of writing. Rather, it's a tool for thinking about a subject, as these brief examples demonstrate:

"Do you ever feel that getting up in the morning is like pulling yourself out of quicksand? . . ." (Jean Betschart, In Control , 2001)
"Sailing a ship through a storm is . . . a good analogy for the conditions inside an organization during turbulent times, since not only will there be the external turbulence to deal with, but internal turbulence as well . . ." (Peter Lorange, Leading in Turbulent Times , 2010)
"For some people, reading a good book is like a Calgon bubble bath — it takes you away. . . ." (Kris Carr, Crazy Sexy Cancer Survivor , 2008)
"Ants are so much like human beings as to be an embarrassment. They farm fungi, raise aphids as livestock, launch armies into wars, use chemical sprays to alarm and confuse enemies, capture slaves. . . ." (Lewis Thomas, "On Societies as Organisms," 1971)
"To me, patching up a heart that'd had an attack was like changing out bald tires. They were worn and tired, just like an attack made the heart, but you couldn't just switch out one heart for another. . . ." (C. E. Murphy, Coyote Dreams , 2007)
"Falling in love is like waking up with a cold — or more fittingly, like waking up with a fever. . . ." (William B. Irvine, On Desire , 2006)

British author Dorothy Sayers observed that analogous thinking is a key aspect of the writing process . A composition professor explains:

Analogy illustrates easily and to almost everyone how an "event" can become an "experience" through the adoption of what Miss [Dorothy] Sayers called an "as if" attitude. That is, by arbitrarily looking at an event in several different ways, "as if" if it were this sort of thing, a student can actually experience transformation from the inside. . . . The analogy functions both as a focus and a catalyst for "conversion" of event into experience. It also provides, in some instances not merely the To discover original analogies that can be explored in a paragraph , essay, or speech, apply the "as if" attitude to any one of the 30 topics listed below. In each case, ask yourself, "What is it like ?"

Thirty Topic Suggestions: Analogy

Working at a fast-food restaurant
Moving to a new neighborhood
Starting a new job
Quitting a job
Watching an exciting movie
Reading a good book
Going into debt
Getting out of debt
Losing a close friend
Leaving home for the first time
Taking a difficult exam
Making a speech
Learning a new skill
Gaining a new friend
Responding to bad news
Responding to good news
Attending a new place of worship
Dealing with success
Dealing with failure
Being in a car accident
Falling in love
Getting married
Falling out of love
Experiencing grief
Experiencing joy
Overcoming an addiction to drugs
Watching a friend destroy himself (or herself)
Getting up in the morning
Resisting peer pressure
Discovering a major in college
The Value of Analogies in Writing and Speech
Understanding Analogy
30 Writing Topics: Persuasion
Learn How to Use Extended Definitions in Essays and Speeches
Development in Composition: Building an Essay
501 Topic Suggestions for Writing Essays and Speeches
Topic In Composition and Speech
Definition and Examples of Transitional Paragraphs
List of Topics for How-to Essays
How to Structure an Essay
How to Write a Narrative Essay or Speech
The Ultimate Guide to the 5-Paragraph Essay
Conclusion in Compositions
How to Write a Great Essay for the TOEFL or TOEIC
Understanding Organization in Composition and Speech
Personal Essay Topics

Home — Essay Samples — Philosophy — Reality — Descartes Wax Analogy Analysis

Descartes Wax Analogy Analysis

Categories: Knowledge Perception Reality

About this sample

Words: 623 |

Published: Mar 25, 2024

Words: 623 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

Expert in: Life Psychology Philosophy

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 2634 words

1 pages / 424 words

4 pages / 1907 words

1 pages / 1738 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Reality

Maupassant, Guy de. 'All Over.' Short Stories. Project Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org/files/3090/3090-h/3090-h.htm#link2H_4_0001.Brigham, John C. 'Perception and Reality: A Historical and Critical Study.' Harvard Theological [...]

However, psychology also uses behavior along with the mapping to the DSM from the checklist survey to separate genuine from faked mental illness and this epistemological problem can be solved using the proven to be successful [...]

As we learned in earlier weeks, there are two views on the self. The avocado view and the artichoke view. As we all know An avocado is a pear-shaped fruit with a rough leathery skin, smooth oily edible flesh, and a large stone. [...]

The Illusion of Prosperity: Step into a world where dreams are woven into the fabric of the American identity. Join me in unraveling the harsh reality behind the elusive American Dream and why it often remains just [...]

Slavery by Another Name reveals the grim reality that – contrary to popular belief about the abolition of slavery – African Americans were still subject to forced labor without compensation after The Civil War, despite having [...]

The planning fallacy is a phenomenon which says that however long you think you need to do a task, you actually need longer. Regardless of how many times you have done the task before, or how deep your expert knowledge, there’s [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Analogy and Analogical Reasoning

An analogy is a comparison between two objects, or systems of objects, that highlights respects in which they are thought to be similar. Analogical reasoning is any type of thinking that relies upon an analogy. An analogical argument is an explicit representation of a form of analogical reasoning that cites accepted similarities between two systems to support the conclusion that some further similarity exists. In general (but not always), such arguments belong in the category of ampliative reasoning, since their conclusions do not follow with certainty but are only supported with varying degrees of strength. However, the proper characterization of analogical arguments is subject to debate (see §2.2 ).

Analogical reasoning is fundamental to human thought and, arguably, to some nonhuman animals as well. Historically, analogical reasoning has played an important, but sometimes mysterious, role in a wide range of problem-solving contexts. The explicit use of analogical arguments, since antiquity, has been a distinctive feature of scientific, philosophical and legal reasoning. This article focuses primarily on the nature, evaluation and justification of analogical arguments. Related topics include metaphor , models in science , and precedent and analogy in legal reasoning .

1. Introduction: the many roles of analogy

2.1 examples, 2.2 characterization, 2.3 plausibility, 2.4 analogical inference rules, 3.1 commonsense guidelines, 3.2 aristotle’s theory, 3.3 material criteria: hesse’s theory, 3.4 formal criteria: the structure-mapping theory, 3.5 other theories, 3.6 practice-based approaches, 4.1 deductive justification, 4.2 inductive justification, 4.3 a priori justification, 4.4 pragmatic justification, 5.1 analogy and confirmation, 5.2 conceptual change and theory development, online manuscript, related entries.

Analogies are widely recognized as playing an important heuristic role, as aids to discovery. They have been employed, in a wide variety of settings and with considerable success, to generate insight and to formulate possible solutions to problems. According to Joseph Priestley, a pioneer in chemistry and electricity,

analogy is our best guide in all philosophical investigations; and all discoveries, which were not made by mere accident, have been made by the help of it. (1769/1966: 14)

Priestley may be over-stating the case, but there is no doubt that analogies have suggested fruitful lines of inquiry in many fields. Because of their heuristic value, analogies and analogical reasoning have been a particular focus of AI research. Hájek (2018) examines analogy as a heuristic tool in philosophy.

Example 1 . Hydrodynamic analogies exploit mathematical similarities between the equations governing ideal fluid flow and torsional problems. To predict stresses in a planned structure, one can construct a fluid model, i.e., a system of pipes through which water passes (Timoshenko and Goodier 1970). Within the limits of idealization, such analogies allow us to make demonstrative inferences, for example, from a measured quantity in the fluid model to the analogous value in the torsional problem. In practice, there are numerous complications (Sterrett 2006).

At the other extreme, an analogical argument may provide very weak support for its conclusion, establishing no more than minimal plausibility. Consider:

Example 2 . Thomas Reid’s (1785) argument for the existence of life on other planets (Stebbing 1933; Mill 1843/1930; Robinson 1930; Copi 1961). Reid notes a number of similarities between Earth and the other planets in our solar system: all orbit and are illuminated by the sun; several have moons; all revolve on an axis. In consequence, he concludes, it is “not unreasonable to think, that those planets may, like our earth, be the habitation of various orders of living creatures” (1785: 24).

Such modesty is not uncommon. Often the point of an analogical argument is just to persuade people to take an idea seriously. For instance:

Example 3 . Darwin takes himself to be using an analogy between artificial and natural selection to argue for the plausibility of the latter:

Why may I not invent the hypothesis of Natural Selection (which from the analogy of domestic productions, and from what we know of the struggle of existence and of the variability of organic beings, is, in some very slight degree, in itself probable) and try whether this hypothesis of Natural Selection does not explain (as I think it does) a large number of facts…. ( Letter to Henslow , May 1860 in Darwin 1903)

Here it appears, by Darwin’s own admission, that his analogy is employed to show that the hypothesis is probable to some “slight degree” and thus merits further investigation. Some, however, reject this characterization of Darwin’s reasoning (Richards 1997; Gildenhuys 2004).

Sometimes analogical reasoning is the only available form of justification for a hypothesis. The method of ethnographic analogy is used to interpret

the nonobservable behaviour of the ancient inhabitants of an archaeological site (or ancient culture) based on the similarity of their artifacts to those used by living peoples. (Hunter and Whitten 1976: 147)

For example:

Example 4 . Shelley (1999, 2003) describes how ethnographic analogy was used to determine the probable significance of odd markings on the necks of Moche clay pots found in the Peruvian Andes. Contemporary potters in Peru use these marks (called sígnales ) to indicate ownership; the marks enable them to reclaim their work when several potters share a kiln or storage facility. Analogical reasoning may be the only avenue of inference to the past in such cases, though this point is subject to dispute (Gould and Watson 1982; Wylie 1982, 1985). Analogical reasoning may have similar significance for cosmological phenomena that are inaccessible due to limits on observation (Dardashti et al. 2017). See §5.1 for further discussion.

As philosophers and historians such as Kuhn (1996) have repeatedly pointed out, there is not always a clear separation between the two roles that we have identified, discovery and justification. Indeed, the two functions are blended in what we might call the programmatic (or paradigmatic ) role of analogy: over a period of time, an analogy can shape the development of a program of research. For example:

Example 5 . An ‘acoustical analogy’ was employed for many years by certain nineteenth-century physicists investigating spectral lines. Discrete spectra were thought to be

completely analogous to the acoustical situation, with atoms (and/or molecules) serving as oscillators originating or absorbing the vibrations in the manner of resonant tuning forks. (Maier 1981: 51)

Guided by this analogy, physicists looked for groups of spectral lines that exhibited frequency patterns characteristic of a harmonic oscillator. This analogy served not only to underwrite the plausibility of conjectures, but also to guide and limit discovery by pointing scientists in certain directions.

More generally, analogies can play an important programmatic role by guiding conceptual development (see §5.2 ). In some cases, a programmatic analogy culminates in the theoretical unification of two different areas of inquiry.

Example 6 . Descartes’s (1637/1954) correlation between geometry and algebra provided methods for systematically handling geometrical problems that had long been recognized as analogous. A very different relationship between analogy and discovery exists when a programmatic analogy breaks down, as was the ultimate fate of the acoustical analogy. That atomic spectra have an entirely different explanation became clear with the advent of quantum theory. In this case, novel discoveries emerged against background expectations shaped by the guiding analogy. There is a third possibility: an unproductive or misleading programmatic analogy may simply become entrenched and self-perpetuating as it leads us to “construct… data that conform to it” (Stepan 1996: 133). Arguably, the danger of this third possibility provides strong motivation for developing a critical account of analogical reasoning and analogical arguments.

Analogical cognition , which embraces all cognitive processes involved in discovering, constructing and using analogies, is broader than analogical reasoning (Hofstadter 2001; Hofstadter and Sander 2013). Understanding these processes is an important objective of current cognitive science research, and an objective that generates many questions. How do humans identify analogies? Do nonhuman animals use analogies in ways similar to humans? How do analogies and metaphors influence concept formation?

This entry, however, concentrates specifically on analogical arguments. Specifically, it focuses on three central epistemological questions:

What criteria should we use to evaluate analogical arguments?
What philosophical justification can be provided for analogical inferences?
How do analogical arguments fit into a broader inferential context (i.e., how do we combine them with other forms of inference), especially theoretical confirmation?

Following a preliminary discussion of the basic structure of analogical arguments, the entry reviews selected attempts to provide answers to these three questions. To find such answers would constitute an important first step towards understanding the nature of analogical reasoning. To isolate these questions, however, is to make the non-trivial assumption that there can be a theory of analogical arguments —an assumption which, as we shall see, is attacked in different ways by both philosophers and cognitive scientists.

2. Analogical arguments

Analogical arguments vary greatly in subject matter, strength and logical structure. In order to appreciate this variety, it is helpful to increase our stock of examples. First, a geometric example:

Example 7 (Rectangles and boxes). Suppose that you have established that of all rectangles with a fixed perimeter, the square has maximum area. By analogy, you conjecture that of all boxes with a fixed surface area, the cube has maximum volume.

Two examples from the history of science:

Example 8 (Morphine and meperidine). In 1934, the pharmacologist Schaumann was testing synthetic compounds for their anti-spasmodic effect. These drugs had a chemical structure similar to morphine. He observed that one of the compounds— meperidine , also known as Demerol —had a physical effect on mice that was previously observed only with morphine: it induced an S-shaped tail curvature. By analogy, he conjectured that the drug might also share morphine’s narcotic effects. Testing on rats, rabbits, dogs and eventually humans showed that meperidine, like morphine, was an effective pain-killer (Lembeck 1989: 11; Reynolds and Randall 1975: 273).

Example 9 (Priestley on electrostatic force). In 1769, Priestley suggested that the absence of electrical influence inside a hollow charged spherical shell was evidence that charges attract and repel with an inverse square force. He supported his hypothesis by appealing to the analogous situation of zero gravitational force inside a hollow shell of uniform density.

Finally, an example from legal reasoning:

Example 10 (Duty of reasonable care). In a much-cited case ( Donoghue v. Stevenson 1932 AC 562), the United Kingdom House of Lords found the manufacturer of a bottle of ginger beer liable for damages to a consumer who became ill as a result of a dead snail in the bottle. The court argued that the manufacturer had a duty to take “reasonable care” in creating a product that could foreseeably result in harm to the consumer in the absence of such care, and where the consumer had no possibility of intermediate examination. The principle articulated in this famous case was extended, by analogy, to allow recovery for harm against an engineering firm whose negligent repair work caused the collapse of a lift ( Haseldine v. CA Daw & Son Ltd. 1941 2 KB 343). By contrast, the principle was not applicable to a case where a workman was injured by a defective crane, since the workman had opportunity to examine the crane and was even aware of the defects ( Farr v. Butters Brothers & Co. 1932 2 KB 606).

What, if anything, do all of these examples have in common? We begin with a simple, quasi-formal characterization. Similar formulations are found in elementary critical thinking texts (e.g., Copi and Cohen 2005) and in the literature on argumentation theory (e.g., Govier 1999, Guarini 2004, Walton and Hyra 2018). An analogical argument has the following form:

$S$ is similar to $T$ in certain (known) respects.
$S$ has some further feature $Q$.
Therefore, $T$ also has the feature $Q$, or some feature $Q^*$ similar to $Q$.

(1) and (2) are premises. (3) is the conclusion of the argument. The argument form is ampliative ; the conclusion is not guaranteed to follow from the premises.

$S$ and $T$ are referred to as the source domain and target domain , respectively. A domain is a set of objects, properties, relations and functions, together with a set of accepted statements about those objects, properties, relations and functions. More formally, a domain consists of a set of objects and an interpreted set of statements about them. The statements need not belong to a first-order language, but to keep things simple, any formalizations employed here will be first-order. We use unstarred symbols $(a, P, R, f)$ to refer to items in the source domain and starred symbols $(a^*, P^*, R^*, f^*)$ to refer to corresponding items in the target domain. In Example 9 , the source domain items pertain to gravitation; the target items pertain to electrostatic attraction.

Formally, an analogy between $S$ and $T$ is a one-to-one mapping between objects, properties, relations and functions in $S$ and those in $T$. Not all of the items in $S$ and $T$ need to be placed in correspondence. Commonly, the analogy only identifies correspondences between a select set of items. In practice, we specify an analogy simply by indicating the most significant similarities (and sometimes differences).

We can improve on this preliminary characterization of the argument from analogy by introducing the tabular representation found in Hesse (1966). We place corresponding objects, properties, relations and propositions side-by-side in a table of two columns, one for each domain. For instance, Reid’s argument ( Example 2 ) can be represented as follows (using $\Rightarrow$ for the analogical inference):

Hesse introduced useful terminology based on this tabular representation. The horizontal relations in an analogy are the relations of similarity (and difference) in the mapping between domains, while the vertical relations are those between the objects, relations and properties within each domain. The correspondence (similarity) between earth’s having a moon and Mars’ having moons is a horizontal relation; the causal relation between having a moon and supporting life is a vertical relation within the source domain (with the possibility of a distinct such relation existing in the target as well).

In an earlier discussion of analogy, Keynes (1921) introduced some terminology that is also helpful.

Positive analogy . Let $P$ stand for a list of accepted propositions $P_1 , \ldots ,P_n$ about the source domain $S$. Suppose that the corresponding propositions $P^*_1 , \ldots ,P^*_n$, abbreviated as $P^*$, are all accepted as holding for the target domain $T$, so that $P$ and $P^*$ represent accepted (or known) similarities. Then we refer to $P$ as the positive analogy .

Negative analogy . Let $A$ stand for a list of propositions $A_1 , \ldots ,A_r$ accepted as holding in $S$, and $B^*$ for a list $B_1^*, \ldots ,B_s^*$ of propositions holding in $T$. Suppose that the analogous propositions $A^* = A_1^*, \ldots ,A_r^*$ fail to hold in $T$, and similarly the propositions $B = B_1 , \ldots ,B_s$ fail to hold in $S$, so that $A, {\sim}A^*$ and ${\sim}B, B^*$ represent accepted (or known) differences. Then we refer to $A$ and $B$ as the negative analogy .

Neutral analogy . The neutral analogy consists of accepted propositions about $S$ for which it is not known whether an analogue holds in $T$.

Finally we have:

Hypothetical analogy . The hypothetical analogy is simply the proposition $Q$ in the neutral analogy that is the focus of our attention.

These concepts allow us to provide a characterization for an individual analogical argument that is somewhat richer than the original one.

An analogical argument may thus be summarized:

It is plausible that $Q^*$ holds in the target, because of certain known (or accepted) similarities with the source domain, despite certain known (or accepted) differences.

In order for this characterization to be meaningful, we need to say something about the meaning of ‘plausibly.’ To ensure broad applicability over analogical arguments that vary greatly in strength, we interpret plausibility rather liberally as meaning ‘with some degree of support’. In general, judgments of plausibility are made after a claim has been formulated, but prior to rigorous testing or proof. The next sub-section provides further discussion.

Note that this characterization is incomplete in a number of ways. The manner in which we list similarities and differences, the nature of the correspondences between domains: these things are left unspecified. Nor does this characterization accommodate reasoning with multiple analogies (i.e., multiple source domains), which is ubiquitous in legal reasoning and common elsewhere. To characterize the argument form more fully, however, is not possible without either taking a step towards a substantive theory of analogical reasoning or restricting attention to certain classes of analogical arguments.

Arguments by analogy are extensively discussed within argumentation theory. There is considerable debate about whether they constitute a species of deductive inference (Govier 1999; Waller 2001; Guarini 2004; Kraus 2015). Argumentation theorists also make use of tools such as speech act theory (Bermejo-Luque 2012), argumentation schemes and dialogue types (Macagno et al. 2017; Walton and Hyra 2018) to distinguish different types of analogical argument.

Arguments by analogy are also discussed in the vast literature on scientific models and model-based reasoning, following the lead of Hesse (1966). Bailer-Jones (2002) draws a helpful distinction between analogies and models. While “many models have their roots in an analogy” (2002: 113) and analogy “can act as a catalyst to aid modeling,” Bailer-Jones observes that “the aim of modeling has nothing intrinsically to do with analogy.” In brief, models are tools for prediction and explanation, whereas analogical arguments aim at establishing plausibility. An analogy is evaluated in terms of source-target similarity, while a model is evaluated on how successfully it “provides access to a phenomenon in that it interprets the available empirical data about the phenomenon.” If we broaden our perspective beyond analogical arguments , however, the connection between models and analogies is restored. Nersessian (2009), for instance, stresses the role of analog models in concept-formation and other cognitive processes.

To say that a hypothesis is plausible is to convey that it has epistemic support: we have some reason to believe it, even prior to testing. An assertion of plausibility within the context of an inquiry typically has pragmatic connotations as well: to say that a hypothesis is plausible suggests that we have some reason to investigate it further. For example, a mathematician working on a proof regards a conjecture as plausible if it “has some chances of success” (Polya 1954 (v. 2): 148). On both points, there is ambiguity as to whether an assertion of plausibility is categorical or a matter of degree. These observations point to the existence of two distinct conceptions of plausibility, probabilistic and modal , either of which may reflect the intended conclusion of an analogical argument.

On the probabilistic conception, plausibility is naturally identified with rational credence (rational subjective degree of belief) and is typically represented as a probability. A classic expression may be found in Mill’s analysis of the argument from analogy in A System of Logic :

There can be no doubt that every resemblance [not known to be irrelevant] affords some degree of probability, beyond what would otherwise exist, in favour of the conclusion. (Mill 1843/1930: 333)

In the terminology introduced in §2.2, Mill’s idea is that each element of the positive analogy boosts the probability of the conclusion. Contemporary ‘structure-mapping’ theories ( §3.4 ) employ a restricted version: each structural similarity between two domains contributes to the overall measure of similarity, and hence to the strength of the analogical argument.

On the alternative modal conception, ‘it is plausible that $p$’ is not a matter of degree. The meaning, roughly speaking, is that there are sufficient initial grounds for taking $p$ seriously, i.e., for further investigation (subject to feasibility and interest). Informally: $p$ passes an initial screening procedure. There is no assertion of degree. Instead, ‘It is plausible that’ may be regarded as an epistemic modal operator that aims to capture a notion, prima facie plausibility, that is somewhat stronger than ordinary epistemic possibility. The intent is to single out $p$ from an undifferentiated mass of ideas that remain bare epistemic possibilities. To illustrate: in 1769, Priestley’s argument ( Example 9 ), if successful, would establish the prima facie plausibility of an inverse square law for electrostatic attraction. The set of epistemic possibilities—hypotheses about electrostatic attraction compatible with knowledge of the day—was much larger. Individual analogical arguments in mathematics (such as Example 7 ) are almost invariably directed towards prima facie plausibility.

The modal conception figures importantly in some discussions of analogical reasoning. The physicist N. R. Campbell (1957) writes:

But in order that a theory may be valuable it must … display an analogy. The propositions of the hypothesis must be analogous to some known laws…. (1957: 129)

Commenting on the role of analogy in Fourier’s theory of heat conduction, Campbell writes:

Some analogy is essential to it; for it is only this analogy which distinguishes the theory from the multitude of others… which might also be proposed to explain the same laws. (1957: 142)

The interesting notion here is that of a “valuable” theory. We may not agree with Campbell that the existence of analogy is “essential” for a novel theory to be “valuable.” But consider the weaker thesis that an acceptable analogy is sufficient to establish that a theory is “valuable”, or (to qualify still further) that an acceptable analogy provides defeasible grounds for taking the theory seriously. (Possible defeaters might include internal inconsistency, inconsistency with accepted theory, or the existence of a (clearly superior) rival analogical argument.) The point is that Campbell, following the lead of 19 th century philosopher-scientists such as Herschel and Whewell, thinks that analogies can establish this sort of prima facie plausibility. Snyder (2006) provides a detailed discussion of the latter two thinkers and their ideas about the role of analogies in science.

In general, analogical arguments may be directed at establishing either sort of plausibility for their conclusions; they can have a probabilistic use or a modal use. Examples 7 through 9 are best interpreted as supporting modal conclusions. In those arguments, an analogy is used to show that a conjecture is worth taking seriously. To insist on putting the conclusion in probabilistic terms distracts attention from the point of the argument. The conclusion might be modeled (by a Bayesian) as having a certain probability value because it is deemed prima facie plausible, but not vice versa. Example 2 , perhaps, might be regarded as directed primarily towards a probabilistic conclusion.

There should be connections between the two conceptions. Indeed, we might think that the same analogical argument can establish both prima facie plausibility and a degree of probability for a hypothesis. But it is difficult to translate between epistemic modal concepts and probabilities (Cohen 1980; Douven and Williamson 2006; Huber 2009; Spohn 2009, 2012). We cannot simply take the probabilistic notion as the primitive one. It seems wise to keep the two conceptions of plausibility separate.

Schema (4) is a template that represents all analogical arguments, good and bad. It is not an inference rule. Despite the confidence with which particular analogical arguments are advanced, nobody has ever formulated an acceptable rule, or set of rules, for valid analogical inferences. There is not even a plausible candidate. This situation is in marked contrast not only with deductive reasoning, but also with elementary forms of inductive reasoning, such as induction by enumeration.

Of course, it is difficult to show that no successful analogical inference rule will ever be proposed. But consider the following candidate, formulated using the concepts of schema (4) and taking us only a short step beyond that basic characterization.

Rule (5) is modeled on the straight rule for enumerative induction and inspired by Mill’s view of analogical inference, as described in §2.3. We use the generic phrase ‘degree of support’ in place of probability, since other factors besides the analogical argument may influence our probability assignment for $Q^*$.

It is pretty clear that (5) is a non-starter. The main problem is that the rule justifies too much. The only substantive requirement introduced by (5) is that there be a nonempty positive analogy. Plainly, there are analogical arguments that satisfy this condition but establish no prima facie plausibility and no measure of support for their conclusions.

Here is a simple illustration. Achinstein (1964: 328) observes that there is a formal analogy between swans and line segments if we take the relation ‘has the same color as’ to correspond to ‘is congruent with’. Both relations are reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. Yet it would be absurd to find positive support from this analogy for the idea that we are likely to find congruent lines clustered in groups of two or more, just because swans of the same color are commonly found in groups. The positive analogy is antecedently known to be irrelevant to the hypothetical analogy. In such a case, the analogical inference should be utterly rejected. Yet rule (5) would wrongly assign non-zero degree of support.

To generalize the difficulty: not every similarity increases the probability of the conclusion and not every difference decreases it. Some similarities and differences are known to be (or accepted as being) utterly irrelevant and should have no influence whatsoever on our probability judgments. To be viable, rule (5) would need to be supplemented with considerations of relevance , which depend upon the subject matter, historical context and logical details particular to each analogical argument. To search for a simple rule of analogical inference thus appears futile.

Carnap and his followers (Carnap 1980; Kuipers 1988; Niiniluoto 1988; Maher 2000; Romeijn 2006) have formulated principles of analogy for inductive logic, using Carnapian $\lambda \gamma$ rules. Generally, this body of work relates to “analogy by similarity”, rather than the type of analogical reasoning discussed here. Romeijn (2006) maintains that there is a relation between Carnap’s concept of analogy and analogical prediction. His approach is a hybrid of Carnap-style inductive rules and a Bayesian model. Such an approach would need to be generalized to handle the kinds of arguments described in §2.1 . It remains unclear that the Carnapian approach can provide a general rule for analogical inference.

Norton (2010, and 2018—see Other Internet Resources) has argued that the project of formalizing inductive reasoning in terms of one or more simple formal schemata is doomed. His criticisms seem especially apt when applied to analogical reasoning. He writes:

If analogical reasoning is required to conform only to a simple formal schema, the restriction is too permissive. Inferences are authorized that clearly should not pass muster… The natural response has been to develop more elaborate formal templates… The familiar difficulty is that these embellished schema never seem to be quite embellished enough; there always seems to be some part of the analysis that must be handled intuitively without guidance from strict formal rules. (2018: 1)

Norton takes the point one step further, in keeping with his “material theory” of inductive inference. He argues that there is no universal logical principle that “powers” analogical inference “by asserting that things that share some properties must share others.” Rather, each analogical inference is warranted by some local constellation of facts about the target system that he terms “the fact of analogy”. These local facts are to be determined and investigated on a case by case basis.

To embrace a purely formal approach to analogy and to abjure formalization entirely are two extremes in a spectrum of strategies. There are intermediate positions. Most recent analyses (both philosophical and computational) have been directed towards elucidating criteria and procedures, rather than formal rules, for reasoning by analogy. So long as these are not intended to provide a universal ‘logic’ of analogy, there is room for such criteria even if one accepts Norton’s basic point. The next section discusses some of these criteria and procedures.

3. Criteria for evaluating analogical arguments

Logicians and philosophers of science have identified ‘textbook-style’ general guidelines for evaluating analogical arguments (Mill 1843/1930; Keynes 1921; Robinson 1930; Stebbing 1933; Copi and Cohen 2005; Moore and Parker 1998; Woods, Irvine, and Walton 2004). Here are some of the most important ones:

These principles can be helpful, but are frequently too vague to provide much insight. How do we count similarities and differences in applying (G1) and (G2)? Why are the structural and causal analogies mentioned in (G5) and (G6) especially important, and which structural and causal features merit attention? More generally, in connection with the all-important (G7): how do we determine which similarities and differences are relevant to the conclusion? Furthermore, what are we to say about similarities and differences that have been omitted from an analogical argument but might still be relevant?

An additional problem is that the criteria can pull in different directions. To illustrate, consider Reid’s argument for life on other planets ( Example 2 ). Stebbing (1933) finds Reid’s argument “suggestive” and “not unplausible” because the conclusion is weak (G4), while Mill (1843/1930) appears to reject the argument on account of our vast ignorance of properties that might be relevant (G3).

There is a further problem that relates to the distinction just made (in §2.3 ) between two kinds of plausibility. Each of the above criteria apart from (G7) is expressed in terms of the strength of the argument, i.e., the degree of support for the conclusion. The criteria thus appear to presuppose the probabilistic interpretation of plausibility. The problem is that a great many analogical arguments aim to establish prima facie plausibility rather than any degree of probability. Most of the guidelines are not directly applicable to such arguments.

Aristotle sets the stage for all later theories of analogical reasoning. In his theoretical reflections on analogy and in his most judicious examples, we find a sober account that lays the foundation both for the commonsense guidelines noted above and for more sophisticated analyses.

Although Aristotle employs the term analogy ( analogia ) and discusses analogical predication , he never talks about analogical reasoning or analogical arguments per se . He does, however, identify two argument forms, the argument from example ( paradeigma ) and the argument from likeness ( homoiotes ), both closely related to what would we now recognize as an analogical argument.

The argument from example ( paradeigma ) is described in the Rhetoric and the Prior Analytics :

Enthymemes based upon example are those which proceed from one or more similar cases, arrive at a general proposition, and then argue deductively to a particular inference. ( Rhetoric 1402b15) Let $A$ be evil, $B$ making war against neighbours, $C$ Athenians against Thebans, $D$ Thebans against Phocians. If then we wish to prove that to fight with the Thebans is an evil, we must assume that to fight against neighbours is an evil. Conviction of this is obtained from similar cases, e.g., that the war against the Phocians was an evil to the Thebans. Since then to fight against neighbours is an evil, and to fight against the Thebans is to fight against neighbours, it is clear that to fight against the Thebans is an evil. ( Pr. An. 69a1)

Aristotle notes two differences between this argument form and induction (69a15ff.): it “does not draw its proof from all the particular cases” (i.e., it is not a “complete” induction), and it requires an additional (deductively valid) syllogism as the final step. The argument from example thus amounts to single-case induction followed by deductive inference. It has the following structure (using $\supset$ for the conditional):

[a tree diagram where S is source domain and T is target domain. First node is P(S)&Q(S) in the lower left corner. It is connected by a dashed arrow to (x)(P(x) superset Q(x)) in the top middle which in turn connects by a solid arrow to P(T) and on the next line P(T) superset Q(T) in the lower right. It in turn is connected by a solid arrow to Q(T) below it.]

In the terminology of §2.2, $P$ is the positive analogy and $Q$ is the hypothetical analogy. In Aristotle’s example, $S$ (the source) is war between Phocians and Thebans, $T$ (the target) is war between Athenians and Thebans, $P$ is war between neighbours, and $Q$ is evil. The first inference (dashed arrow) is inductive; the second and third (solid arrows) are deductively valid.

The paradeigma has an interesting feature: it is amenable to an alternative analysis as a purely deductive argument form. Let us concentrate on Aristotle’s assertion, “we must assume that to fight against neighbours is an evil,” represented as $\forall x(P(x) \supset Q(x))$. Instead of regarding this intermediate step as something reached by induction from a single case, we might instead regard it as a hidden presupposition. This transforms the paradeigma into a syllogistic argument with a missing or enthymematic premise, and our attention shifts to possible means for establishing that premise (with single-case induction as one such means). Construed in this way, Aristotle’s paradeigma argument foreshadows deductive analyses of analogical reasoning (see §4.1 ).

The argument from likeness ( homoiotes ) seems to be closer than the paradeigma to our contemporary understanding of analogical arguments. This argument form receives considerable attention in Topics I, 17 and 18 and again in VIII, 1. The most important passage is the following.

Try to secure admissions by means of likeness; for such admissions are plausible, and the universal involved is less patent; e.g. that as knowledge and ignorance of contraries is the same, so too perception of contraries is the same; or vice versa, that since the perception is the same, so is the knowledge also. This argument resembles induction, but is not the same thing; for in induction it is the universal whose admission is secured from the particulars, whereas in arguments from likeness, what is secured is not the universal under which all the like cases fall. ( Topics 156b10–17)

This passage occurs in a work that offers advice for framing dialectical arguments when confronting a somewhat skeptical interlocutor. In such situations, it is best not to make one’s argument depend upon securing agreement about any universal proposition. The argument from likeness is thus clearly distinct from the paradeigma , where the universal proposition plays an essential role as an intermediate step in the argument. The argument from likeness, though logically less straightforward than the paradeigma , is exactly the sort of analogical reasoning we want when we are unsure about underlying generalizations.

In Topics I 17, Aristotle states that any shared attribute contributes some degree of likeness. It is natural to ask when the degree of likeness between two things is sufficiently great to warrant inferring a further likeness. In other words, when does the argument from likeness succeed? Aristotle does not answer explicitly, but a clue is provided by the way he justifies particular arguments from likeness. As Lloyd (1966) has observed, Aristotle typically justifies such arguments by articulating a (sometimes vague) causal principle which governs the two phenomena being compared. For example, Aristotle explains the saltiness of the sea, by analogy with the saltiness of sweat, as a kind of residual earthy stuff exuded in natural processes such as heating. The common principle is this:

Everything that grows and is naturally generated always leaves a residue, like that of things burnt, consisting in this sort of earth. ( Mete 358a17)

From this method of justification, we might conjecture that Aristotle believes that the important similarities are those that enter into such general causal principles.

Summarizing, Aristotle’s theory provides us with four important and influential criteria for the evaluation of analogical arguments:

The strength of an analogy depends upon the number of similarities.
Similarity reduces to identical properties and relations.
Good analogies derive from underlying common causes or general laws.
A good analogical argument need not pre-suppose acquaintance with the underlying universal (generalization).

These four principles form the core of a common-sense model for evaluating analogical arguments (which is not to say that they are correct; indeed, the first three will shortly be called into question). The first, as we have seen, appears regularly in textbook discussions of analogy. The second is largely taken for granted, with important exceptions in computational models of analogy ( §3.4 ). Versions of the third are found in most sophisticated theories. The final point, which distinguishes the argument from likeness and the argument from example, is endorsed in many discussions of analogy (e.g., Quine and Ullian 1970).

A slight generalization of Aristotle’s first principle helps to prepare the way for discussion of later developments. As that principle suggests, Aristotle, in common with just about everyone else who has written about analogical reasoning, organizes his analysis of the argument form around overall similarity. In the terminology of section 2.2, horizontal relationships drive the reasoning: the greater the overall similarity of the two domains, the stronger the analogical argument . Hume makes the same point, though stated negatively, in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion :

Wherever you depart, in the least, from the similarity of the cases, you diminish proportionably the evidence; and may at last bring it to a very weak analogy, which is confessedly liable to error and uncertainty. (1779/1947: 144)

Most theories of analogy agree with Aristotle and Hume on this general point. Disagreement relates to the appropriate way of measuring overall similarity. Some theories assign greatest weight to material analogy , which refers to shared, and typically observable, features. Others give prominence to formal analogy , emphasizing high-level structural correspondence. The next two sub-sections discuss representative accounts that illustrate these two approaches.

Hesse (1966) offers a sharpened version of Aristotle’s theory, specifically focused on analogical arguments in the sciences. She formulates three requirements that an analogical argument must satisfy in order to be acceptable:

Requirement of material analogy . The horizontal relations must include similarities between observable properties.
Causal condition . The vertical relations must be causal relations “in some acceptable scientific sense” (1966: 87).
No-essential-difference condition . The essential properties and causal relations of the source domain must not have been shown to be part of the negative analogy.

3.3.1 Requirement of material analogy

For Hesse, an acceptable analogical argument must include “observable similarities” between domains, which she refers to as material analogy . Material analogy is contrasted with formal analogy . Two domains are formally analogous if both are “interpretations of the same formal theory” (1966: 68). Nomic isomorphism (Hempel 1965) is a special case in which the physical laws governing two systems have identical mathematical form. Heat and fluid flow exhibit nomic isomorphism. A second example is the analogy between the flow of electric current in a wire and fluid in a pipe. Ohm’s law

states that voltage difference along a wire equals current times a constant resistance. This has the same mathematical form as Poiseuille’s law (for ideal fluids):

which states that the pressure difference along a pipe equals the volumetric flow rate times a constant. Both of these systems can be represented by a common equation. While formal analogy is linked to common mathematical structure, it should not be limited to nomic isomorphism (Bartha 2010: 209). The idea of formal analogy generalizes to cases where there is a common mathematical structure between models for two systems. Bartha offers an even more liberal definition (2010: 195): “Two features are formally similar if they occupy corresponding positions in formally analogous theories. For example, pitch in the theory of sound corresponds to color in the theory of light.”

By contrast, material analogy consists of what Hesse calls “observable” or “pre-theoretic” similarities. These are horizontal relationships of similarity between properties of objects in the source and the target. Similarities between echoes (sound) and reflection (light), for instance, were recognized long before we had any detailed theories about these phenomena. Hesse (1966, 1988) regards such similarities as metaphorical relationships between the two domains and labels them “pre-theoretic” because they draw on personal and cultural experience. We have both material and formal analogies between sound and light, and it is significant for Hesse that the former are independent of the latter.

There are good reasons not to accept Hesse’s requirement of material analogy, construed in this narrow way. First, it is apparent that formal analogies are the starting point in many important inferences. That is certainly the case in mathematics, a field in which material analogy, in Hesse’s sense, plays no role at all. Analogical arguments based on formal analogy have also been extremely influential in physics (Steiner 1989, 1998).

In Norton’s broad sense, however, ‘material analogy’ simply refers to similarities rooted in factual knowledge of the source and target domains. With reference to this broader meaning, Hesse proposes two additional material criteria.

3.3.2 Causal condition

Hesse requires that the hypothetical analogy, the feature transferred to the target domain, be causally related to the positive analogy. In her words, the essential requirement for a good argument from analogy is “a tendency to co-occurrence”, i.e., a causal relationship. She states the requirement as follows:

The vertical relations in the model [source] are causal relations in some acceptable scientific sense, where there are no compelling a priori reasons for denying that causal relations of the same kind may hold between terms of the explanandum [target]. (1966: 87)

The causal condition rules out analogical arguments where there is no causal knowledge of the source domain. It derives support from the observation that many analogies do appear to involve a transfer of causal knowledge.

The causal condition is on the right track, but is arguably too restrictive. For example, it rules out analogical arguments in mathematics. Even if we limit attention to the empirical sciences, persuasive analogical arguments may be founded upon strong statistical correlation in the absence of any known causal connection. Consider ( Example 11 ) Benjamin Franklin’s prediction, in 1749, that pointed metal rods would attract lightning, by analogy with the way they attracted the “electrical fluid” in the laboratory:

Electrical fluid agrees with lightning in these particulars: 1. Giving light. 2. Colour of the light. 3. Crooked direction. 4. Swift motion. 5. Being conducted by metals. 6. Crack or noise in exploding. 7. Subsisting in water or ice. 8. Rending bodies it passes through. 9. Destroying animals. 10. Melting metals. 11. Firing inflammable substances. 12. Sulphureous smell.—The electrical fluid is attracted by points.—We do not know whether this property is in lightning.—But since they agree in all the particulars wherein we can already compare them, is it not probable they agree likewise in this? Let the experiment be made. ( Benjamin Franklin’s Experiments , 334)

Franklin’s hypothesis was based on a long list of properties common to the target (lightning) and source (electrical fluid in the laboratory). There was no known causal connection between the twelve “particulars” and the thirteenth property, but there was a strong correlation. Analogical arguments may be plausible even where there are no known causal relations.

3.3.3 No-essential-difference condition

Hesse’s final requirement is that the “essential properties and causal relations of the [source] have not been shown to be part of the negative analogy” (1966: 91). Hesse does not provide a definition of “essential,” but suggests that a property or relation is essential if it is “causally closely related to the known positive analogy.” For instance, an analogy with fluid flow was extremely influential in developing the theory of heat conduction. Once it was discovered that heat was not conserved, however, the analogy became unacceptable (according to Hesse) because conservation was so central to the theory of fluid flow.

This requirement, though once again on the right track, seems too restrictive. It can lead to the rejection of a good analogical argument. Consider the analogy between a two-dimensional rectangle and a three-dimensional box ( Example 7 ). Broadening Hesse’s notion, it seems that there are many ‘essential’ differences between rectangles and boxes. This does not mean that we should reject every analogy between rectangles and boxes out of hand. The problem derives from the fact that Hesse’s condition is applied to the analogy relation independently of the use to which that relation is put. What counts as essential should vary with the analogical argument. Absent an inferential context, it is impossible to evaluate the importance or ‘essentiality’ of similarities and differences.

Despite these weaknesses, Hesse’s ‘material’ criteria constitute a significant advance in our understanding of analogical reasoning. The causal condition and the no-essential-difference condition incorporate local factors, as urged by Norton, into the assessment of analogical arguments. These conditions, singly or taken together, imply that an analogical argument can fail to generate any support for its conclusion, even when there is a non-empty positive analogy. Hesse offers no theory about the ‘degree’ of analogical support. That makes her account one of the few that is oriented towards the modal, rather than probabilistic, use of analogical arguments ( §2.3 ).

Many people take the concept of model-theoretic isomorphism to set the standard for thinking about similarity and its role in analogical reasoning. They propose formal criteria for evaluating analogies, based on overall structural or syntactical similarity. Let us refer to theories oriented around such criteria as structuralist .

A number of leading computational models of analogy are structuralist. They are implemented in computer programs that begin with (or sometimes build) representations of the source and target domains, and then construct possible analogy mappings. Analogical inferences emerge as a consequence of identifying the ‘best mapping.’ In terms of criteria for analogical reasoning, there are two main ideas. First, the goodness of an analogical argument is based on the goodness of the associated analogy mapping . Second, the goodness of the analogy mapping is given by a metric that indicates how closely it approximates isomorphism.

The most influential structuralist theory has been Gentner’s structure-mapping theory, implemented in a program called the structure-mapping engine (SME). In its original form (Gentner 1983), the theory assesses analogies on purely structural grounds. Gentner asserts:

Analogies are about relations, rather than simple features. No matter what kind of knowledge (causal models, plans, stories, etc.), it is the structural properties (i.e., the interrelationships between the facts) that determine the content of an analogy. (Falkenhainer, Forbus, and Gentner 1989/90: 3)

In order to clarify this thesis, Gentner introduces a distinction between properties , or monadic predicates, and relations , which have multiple arguments. She further distinguishes among different orders of relations and functions, defined inductively (in terms of the order of the relata or arguments). The best mapping is determined by systematicity : the extent to which it places higher-order relations, and items that are nested in higher-order relations, in correspondence. Gentner’s Systematicity Principle states:

A predicate that belongs to a mappable system of mutually interconnecting relationships is more likely to be imported into the target than is an isolated predicate. (1983: 163)

A systematic analogy (one that places high-order relations and their components in correspondence) is better than a less systematic analogy. Hence, an analogical inference has a degree of plausibility that increases monotonically with the degree of systematicity of the associated analogy mapping. Gentner’s fundamental criterion for evaluating candidate analogies (and analogical inferences) thus depends solely upon the syntax of the given representations and not at all upon their content.

Later versions of the structure-mapping theory incorporate refinements (Forbus, Ferguson, and Gentner 1994; Forbus 2001; Forbus et al. 2007; Forbus et al. 2008; Forbus et al 2017). For example, the earliest version of the theory is vulnerable to worries about hand-coded representations of source and target domains. Gentner and her colleagues have attempted to solve this problem in later work that generates LISP representations from natural language text (see Turney 2008 for a different approach).

The most important challenges for the structure-mapping approach relate to the Systematicity Principle itself. Does the value of an analogy derive entirely, or even chiefly, from systematicity? There appear to be two main difficulties with this view. First: it is not always appropriate to give priority to systematic, high-level relational matches. Material criteria, and notably what Gentner refers to as “superficial feature matches,” can be extremely important in some types of analogical reasoning, such as ethnographic analogies which are based, to a considerable degree, on surface resemblances between artifacts. Second and more significantly: systematicity seems to be at best a fallible marker for good analogies rather than the essence of good analogical reasoning.

Greater systematicity is neither necessary nor sufficient for a more plausible analogical inference. It is obvious that increased systematicity is not sufficient for increased plausibility. An implausible analogy can be represented in a form that exhibits a high degree of structural parallelism. High-order relations can come cheap, as we saw with Achinstein’s “swan” example ( §2.4 ).

More pointedly, increased systematicity is not necessary for greater plausibility. Indeed, in causal analogies, it may even weaken the inference. That is because systematicity takes no account of the type of causal relevance, positive or negative. (McKay 1993) notes that microbes have been found in frozen lakes in Antarctica; by analogy, simple life forms might exist on Mars. Freezing temperatures are preventive or counteracting causes; they are negatively relevant to the existence of life. The climate of Mars was probably more favorable to life 3.5 billion years ago than it is today, because temperatures were warmer. Yet the analogy between Antarctica and present-day Mars is more systematic than the analogy between Antarctica and ancient Mars. According to the Systematicity Principle , the analogy with Antarctica provides stronger support for life on Mars today than it does for life on ancient Mars.

The point of this example is that increased systematicity does not always increase plausibility, and reduced systematicity does not always decrease it (see Lee and Holyoak 2008). The more general point is that systematicity can be misleading, unless we take into account the nature of the relationships between various factors and the hypothetical analogy. Systematicity does not magically produce or explain the plausibility of an analogical argument. When we reason by analogy, we must determine which features of both domains are relevant and how they relate to the analogical conclusion. There is no short-cut via syntax.

Schlimm (2008) offers an entirely different critique of the structure-mapping theory from the perspective of analogical reasoning in mathematics—a domain where one might expect a formal approach such as structure mapping to perform well. Schlimm introduces a simple distinction: a domain is object-rich if the number of objects is greater than the number of relations (and properties), and relation-rich otherwise. Proponents of the structure-mapping theory typically focus on relation-rich examples (such as the analogy between the solar system and the atom). By contrast, analogies in mathematics typically involve domains with an enormous number of objects (like the real numbers), but relatively few relations and functions (addition, multiplication, less-than).

Schlimm provides an example of an analogical reasoning problem in group theory that involves a single relation in each domain. In this case, attaining maximal systematicity is trivial. The difficulty is that, compatible with maximal systematicity, there are different ways in which the objects might be placed in correspondence. The structure-mapping theory appears to yield the wrong inference. We might put the general point as follows: in object-rich domains, systematicity ceases to be a reliable guide to plausible analogical inference.

3.5.1 Connectionist models

During the past thirty-five years, cognitive scientists have conducted extensive research on analogy. Gentner’s SME is just one of many computational theories, implemented in programs that construct and use analogies. Three helpful anthologies that span this period are Helman 1988; Gentner, Holyoak, and Kokinov 2001; and Kokinov, Holyoak, and Gentner 2009.

One predominant objective of this research has been to model the cognitive processes involved in using analogies. Early models tended to be oriented towards “understanding the basic constraints that govern human analogical thinking” (Hummel and Holyoak 1997: 458). Recent connectionist models have been directed towards uncovering the psychological mechanisms that come into play when we use analogies: retrieval of a relevant source domain, analogical mapping across domains, and transfer of information and learning of new categories or schemas.

In some cases, such as the structure-mapping theory (§3.4), this research overlaps directly with the normative questions that are the focus of this entry; indeed, Gentner’s Systematicity Principle may be interpreted normatively. In other cases, we might view the projects as displacing those traditional normative questions with up-to-date, computational forms of naturalized epistemology . Two approaches are singled out here because both raise important challenges to the very idea of finding sharp answers to those questions, and both suggest that connectionist models offer a more fruitful approach to understanding analogical reasoning.

The first is the constraint-satisfaction model (also known as the multiconstraint theory ), developed by Holyoak and Thagard (1989, 1995). Like Gentner, Holyoak and Thagard regard the heart of analogical reasoning as analogy mapping , and they stress the importance of systematicity, which they refer to as a structural constraint. Unlike Gentner, they acknowledge two additional types of constraints. Pragmatic constraints take into account the goals and purposes of the agent, recognizing that “the purpose will guide selection” of relevant similarities. Semantic constraints represent estimates of the degree to which people regard source and target items as being alike, rather like Hesse’s “pre-theoretic” similarities.

The novelty of the multiconstraint theory is that these structural , semantic and pragmatic constraints are implemented not as rigid rules, but rather as ‘pressures’ supporting or inhibiting potential pairwise correspondences. The theory is implemented in a connectionist program called ACME (Analogical Constraint Mapping Engine), which assigns an initial activation value to each possible pairing between elements in the source and target domains (based on semantic and pragmatic constraints), and then runs through cycles that update the activation values based on overall coherence (structural constraints). The best global analogy mapping emerges under the pressure of these constraints. Subsequent connectionist models, such as Hummel and Holyoak’s LISA program (1997, 2003), have made significant advances and hold promise for offering a more complete theory of analogical reasoning.

The second example is Hofstadter and Mitchell’s Copycat program (Hofstadter 1995; Mitchell 1993). The program is “designed to discover insightful analogies, and to do so in a psychologically realistic way” (Hofstadter 1995: 205). Copycat operates in the domain of letter-strings. The program handles the following type of problem:

Suppose the letter-string abc were changed to abd ; how would you change the letter-string ijk in “the same way”?

Most people would answer ijl , since it is natural to think that abc was changed to abd by the “transformation rule”: replace the rightmost letter with its successor. Alternative answers are possible, but do not agree with most people’s sense of what counts as the natural analogy.

Hofstadter and Mitchell believe that analogy-making is in large part about the perception of novel patterns, and that such perception requires concepts with “fluid” boundaries. Genuine analogy-making involves “slippage” of concepts. The Copycat program combines a set of core concepts pertaining to letter-sequences ( successor , leftmost and so forth) with probabilistic “halos” that link distinct concepts dynamically. Orderly structures emerge out of random low-level processes and the program produces plausible solutions. Copycat thus shows that analogy-making can be modeled as a process akin to perception, even if the program employs mechanisms distinct from those in human perception.

The multiconstraint theory and Copycat share the idea that analogical cognition involves cognitive processes that operate below the level of abstract reasoning. Both computational models—to the extent that they are capable of performing successful analogical reasoning—challenge the idea that a successful model of analogical reasoning must take the form of a set of quasi-logical criteria. Efforts to develop a quasi-logical theory of analogical reasoning, it might be argued, have failed. In place of faulty inference schemes such as those described earlier ( §2.2 , §2.4 ), computational models substitute procedures that can be judged on their performance rather than on traditional philosophical standards.

In response to this argument, we should recognize the value of the connectionist models while acknowledging that we still need a theory that offers normative principles for evaluating analogical arguments. In the first place, even if the construction and recognition of analogies are largely a matter of perception, this does not eliminate the need for subsequent critical evaluation of analogical inferences. Second and more importantly, we need to look not just at the construction of analogy mappings but at the ways in which individual analogical arguments are debated in fields such as mathematics, physics, philosophy and the law. These high-level debates require reasoning that bears little resemblance to the computational processes of ACME or Copycat. (Ashley’s HYPO (Ashley 1990) is one example of a non-connectionist program that focuses on this aspect of analogical reasoning.) There is, accordingly, room for both computational and traditional philosophical models of analogical reasoning.

3.5.2 Articulation model

Most prominent theories of analogy, philosophical and computational, are based on overall similarity between source and target domains—defined in terms of some favoured subset of Hesse’s horizontal relations (see §2.2 ). Aristotle and Mill, whose approach is echoed in textbook discussions, suggest counting similarities. Hesse’s theory ( §3.3 ) favours “pre-theoretic” correspondences. The structure-mapping theory and its successors ( §3.4 ) look to systematicity, i.e., to correspondences involving complex, high-level networks of relations. In each of these approaches, the problem is twofold: overall similarity is not a reliable guide to plausibility, and it fails to explain the plausibility of any analogical argument.

Bartha’s articulation model (2010) proposes a different approach, beginning not with horizontal relations, but rather with a classification of analogical arguments on the basis of the vertical relations within each domain. The fundamental idea is that a good analogical argument must satisfy two conditions:

Prior Association . There must be a clear connection, in the source domain, between the known similarities (the positive analogy) and the further similarity that is projected to hold in the target domain (the hypothetical analogy). This relationship determines which features of the source are critical to the analogical inference.

Potential for Generalization . There must be reason to think that the same kind of connection could obtain in the target domain. More pointedly: there must be no critical disanalogy between the domains.

The first order of business is to make the prior association explicit. The standards of explicitness vary depending on the nature of this association (causal relation, mathematical proof, functional relationship, and so forth). The two general principles are fleshed out via a set of subordinate models that allow us to identify critical features and hence critical disanalogies.

To see how this works, consider Example 7 (Rectangles and boxes). In this analogical argument, the source domain is two-dimensional geometry: we know that of all rectangles with a fixed perimeter, the square has maximum area. The target domain is three-dimensional geometry: by analogy, we conjecture that of all boxes with a fixed surface area, the cube has maximum volume. This argument should be evaluated not by counting similarities, looking to pre-theoretic resemblances between rectangles and boxes, or constructing connectionist representations of the domains and computing a systematicity score for possible mappings. Instead, we should begin with a precise articulation of the prior association in the source domain, which amounts to a specific proof for the result about rectangles. We should then identify, relative to that proof, the critical features of the source domain: namely, the concepts and assumptions used in the proof. Finally, we should assess the potential for generalization: whether, in the three-dimensional setting, those critical features are known to lack analogues in the target domain. The articulation model is meant to reflect the conversations that can and do take place between an advocate and a critic of an analogical argument.

3.6.1 Norton’s material theory of analogy

As noted in §2.4 , Norton rejects analogical inference rules. But even if we agree with Norton on this point, we might still be interested in having an account that gives us guidelines for evaluating analogical arguments. How does Norton’s approach fare on this score?

According to Norton, each analogical argument is warranted by local facts that must be investigated and justified empirically. First, there is “the fact of the analogy”: in practice, a low-level uniformity that embraces both the source and target systems. Second, there are additional factual properties of the target system which, when taken together with the uniformity, warrant the analogical inference. Consider Galileo’s famous inference ( Example 12 ) that there are mountains on the moon (Galileo 1610). Through his newly invented telescope, Galileo observed points of light on the moon ahead of the advancing edge of sunlight. Noting that the same thing happens on earth when sunlight strikes the mountains, he concluded that there must be mountains on the moon and even provided a reasonable estimate of their height. In this example, Norton tells us, the the fact of the analogy is that shadows and other optical phenomena are generated in the same way on the earth and on the moon; the additional fact about the target is the existence of points of light ahead of the advancing edge of sunlight on the moon.

What are the implications of Norton’s material theory when it comes to evaluating analogical arguments? The fact of the analogy is a local uniformity that powers the inference. Norton’s theory works well when such a uniformity is patent or naturally inferred. It doesn’t work well when the uniformity is itself the target (rather than the driver ) of the inference. That happens with explanatory analogies such as Example 5 (the Acoustical Analogy ), and mathematical analogies such as Example 7 ( Rectangles and Boxes ). Similarly, the theory doesn’t work well when the underlying uniformity is unclear, as in Example 2 ( Life on other Planets ), Example 4 ( Clay Pots ), and many other cases. In short, if Norton’s theory is accepted, then for most analogical arguments there are no useful evaluation criteria.

3.6.2 Field-specific criteria

For those who sympathize with Norton’s skepticism about universal inductive schemes and theories of analogical reasoning, yet recognize that his approach may be too local, an appealing strategy is to move up one level. We can aim for field-specific “working logics” (Toulmin 1958; Wylie and Chapman 2016; Reiss 2015). This approach has been adopted by philosophers of archaeology, evolutionary biology and other historical sciences (Wylie and Chapman 2016; Currie 2013; Currie 2016; Currie 2018). In place of schemas, we find ‘toolkits’, i.e., lists of criteria for evaluating analogical reasoning.

For example, Currie (2016) explores in detail the use of ethnographic analogy ( Example 13 ) between shamanistic motifs used by the contemporary San people and similar motifs in ancient rock art, found both among ancestors of the San (direct historical analogy) and in European rock art (indirect historical analogy). Analogical arguments support the hypothesis that in each of these cultures, rock art symbolizes hallucinogenic experiences. Currie examines criteria that focus on assumptions about stability of cultural traits and environment-culture relationships. Currie (2016, 2018) and Wylie (Wylie and Chapman 2016) also stress the importance of robustness reasoning that combines analogical arguments of moderate strength with other forms of evidence to yield strong conclusions.

Practice-based approaches can thus yield specific guidelines unlikely to be matched by any general theory of analogical reasoning. One caveat is worth mentioning. Field-specific criteria for ethnographic analogy are elicited against a background of decades of methodological controversy (Wylie and Chapman 2016). Critics and defenders of ethnographic analogy have appealed to general models of scientific method (e.g., hypothetico-deductive method or Bayesian confirmation). To advance the methodological debate, practice-based approaches must either make connections to these general models or explain why the lack of any such connection is unproblematic.

3.6.3 Formal analogies in physics

Close attention to analogical arguments in practice can also provide valuable challenges to general ideas about analogical inference. In an interesting discussion, Steiner (1989, 1998) suggests that many of the analogies that played a major role in early twentieth-century physics count as “Pythagorean.” The term is meant to connote mathematical mysticism: a “Pythagorean” analogy is a purely formal analogy, one founded on mathematical similarities that have no known physical basis at the time it is proposed. One example is Schrödinger’s use of analogy ( Example 14 ) to “guess” the form of the relativistic wave equation. In Steiner’s view, Schrödinger’s reasoning relies upon manipulations and substitutions based on purely mathematical analogies. Steiner argues that the success, and even the plausibility, of such analogies “evokes, or should evoke, puzzlement” (1989: 454). Both Hesse (1966) and Bartha (2010) reject the idea that a purely formal analogy, with no physical significance, can support a plausible analogical inference in physics. Thus, Steiner’s arguments provide a serious challenge.

Bartha (2010) suggests a response: we can decompose Steiner’s examples into two or more steps, and then establish that at least one step does, in fact, have a physical basis. Fraser (forthcoming), however, offers a counterexample that supports Steiner’s position. Complex analogies between classical statistical mechanics (CSM) and quantum field theory (QFT) have played a crucial role in the development and application of renormalization group (RG) methods in both theories ( Example 15 ). Fraser notes substantial physical disanalogies between CSM and QFT, and concludes that the reasoning is based entirely on formal analogies.

4. Philosophical foundations for analogical reasoning

What philosophical basis can be provided for reasoning by analogy? What justification can be given for the claim that analogical arguments deliver plausible conclusions? There have been several ideas for answering this question. One natural strategy assimilates analogical reasoning to some other well-understood argument pattern, a form of deductive or inductive reasoning ( §4.1 , §4.2 ). A few philosophers have explored the possibility of a priori justification ( §4.3 ). A pragmatic justification may be available for practical applications of analogy, notably in legal reasoning ( §4.4 ).

Any attempt to provide a general justification for analogical reasoning faces a basic dilemma. The demands of generality require a high-level formulation of the problem and hence an abstract characterization of analogical arguments, such as schema (4). On the other hand, as noted previously, many analogical arguments that conform to schema (4) are bad arguments. So a general justification of analogical reasoning cannot provide support for all arguments that conform to (4), on pain of proving too much. Instead, it must first specify a subset of putatively ‘good’ analogical arguments, and link the general justification to this specified subset. The problem of justification is linked to the problem of characterizing good analogical arguments . This difficulty afflicts some of the strategies described in this section.

Analogical reasoning may be cast in a deductive mold. If successful, this strategy neatly solves the problem of justification. A valid deductive argument is as good as it gets.

An early version of the deductivist approach is exemplified by Aristotle’s treatment of the argument from example ( §3.2 ), the paradeigma . On this analysis, an analogical argument between source domain $S$ and target $T$ begins with the assumption of positive analogy $P(S)$ and $P(T)$, as well as the additional information $Q(S)$. It proceeds via the generalization $\forall x(P(x) \supset Q(x))$ to the conclusion: $Q(T)$. Provided we can treat that intermediate generalization as an independent premise, we have a deductively valid argument. Notice, though, that the existence of the generalization renders the analogy irrelevant. We can derive $Q(T)$ from the generalization and $P(T)$, without any knowledge of the source domain. The literature on analogy in argumentation theory ( §2.2 ) offers further perspectives on this type of analysis, and on the question of whether analogical arguments are properly characterized as deductive.

Some recent analyses follow Aristotle in treating analogical arguments as reliant upon extra (sometimes tacit) premises, typically drawn from background knowledge, that convert the inference into a deductively valid argument––but without making the source domain irrelevant. Davies and Russell introduce a version that relies upon what they call determination rules (Russell 1986; Davies and Russell 1987; Davies 1988). Suppose that $Q$ and $P_1 , \ldots ,P_m$ are variables, and we have background knowledge that the value of $Q$ is determined by the values of $P_1 , \ldots ,P_m$. In the simplest case, where $m = 1$ and both $P$ and $Q$ are binary Boolean variables, this reduces to

i.e., whether or not $P$ holds determines whether or not $Q$ holds. More generally, the form of a determination rule is

i.e., $Q$ is a function of $P_1,\ldots$, $P_m$. If we assume such a rule as part of our background knowledge, then an analogical argument with conclusion $Q(T)$ is deductively valid. More precisely, and allowing for the case where $Q$ is not a binary variable: if we have such a rule, and also premises stating that the source $S$ agrees with the target $T$ on all of the values $P_i$, then we may validly infer that $Q(T) = Q(S)$.

The “determination rule” analysis provides a clear and simple justification for analogical reasoning. Note that, in contrast to the Aristotelian analysis via the generalization $\forall x(P(x) \supset Q(x))$, a determination rule does not trivialize the analogical argument. Only by combining the rule with information about the source domain can we derive the value of $Q(T)$. To illustrate by adapting one of the examples given by Russell and Davies ( Example 16 ), let’s suppose that the value $(Q)$ of a used car (relative to a particular buyer) is determined by its year, make, mileage, condition, color and accident history (the variables $P_i)$. It doesn’t matter if one or more of these factors are redundant or irrelevant. Provided two cars are indistinguishable on each of these points, they will have the same value. Knowledge of the source domain is necessary; we can’t derive the value of the second car from the determination rule alone. Weitzenfeld (1984) proposes a variant of this approach, advancing the slightly more general thesis that analogical arguments are deductive arguments with a missing (enthymematic) premise that amounts to a determination rule.

Do determination rules give us a solution to the problem of providing a justification for analogical arguments? In general: no. Analogies are commonly applied to problems such as Example 8 ( morphine and meperidine ), where we are not even aware of all relevant factors, let alone in possession of a determination rule. Medical researchers conduct drug tests on animals without knowing all attributes that might be relevant to the effects of the drug. Indeed, one of the main objectives of such testing is to guard against reactions unanticipated by theory. On the “determination rule” analysis, we must either limit the scope of such arguments to cases where we have a well-supported determination rule, or focus attention on formulating and justifying an appropriate determination rule. For cases such as animal testing, neither option seems realistic.

Recasting analogy as a deductive argument may help to bring out background assumptions, but it makes little headway with the problem of justification. That problem re-appears as the need to state and establish the plausibility of a determination rule, and that is at least as difficult as justifying the original analogical argument.

Some philosophers have attempted to portray, and justify, analogical reasoning in terms of some well-understood inductive argument pattern. There have been three moderately popular versions of this strategy. The first treats analogical reasoning as generalization from a single case. The second treats it as a kind of sampling argument. The third recognizes the argument from analogy as a distinctive form, but treats past successes as evidence for future success.

4.2.1 Single-case induction

Let’s reconsider Aristotle’s argument from example or paradeigma ( §3.2 ), but this time regard the generalization as justified via induction from a single case (the source domain). Can such a simple analysis of analogical arguments succeed? In general: no.

A single instance can sometimes lead to a justified generalization. Cartwright (1992) argues that we can sometimes generalize from a single careful experiment, “where we have sufficient control of the materials and our knowledge of the requisite background assumptions is secure” (51). Cartwright thinks that we can do this, for example, in experiments with compounds that have stable “Aristotelian natures.” In a similar spirit, Quine (1969) maintains that we can have instantial confirmation when dealing with natural kinds.

Even if we accept that there are such cases, the objection to understanding all analogical arguments as single-case induction is obvious: the view is simply too restrictive. Most analogical arguments will not meet the requisite conditions. We may not know that we are dealing with a natural kind or Aristotelian nature when we make the analogical argument. We may not know which properties are essential. An insistence on the ‘single-case induction’ analysis of analogical reasoning is likely to lead to skepticism (Agassi 1964, 1988).

Interpreting the argument from analogy as single-case induction is also counter-productive in another way. The simplistic analysis does nothing to advance the search for criteria that help us to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant similarities, and hence between good and bad analogical arguments.

4.2.2 Sampling arguments

On the sampling conception of analogical arguments, acknowledged similarities between two domains are treated as statistically relevant evidence for further similarities. The simplest version of the sampling argument is due to Mill (1843/1930). An argument from analogy, he writes, is “a competition between the known points of agreement and the known points of difference.” Agreement of $A$ and $B$ in 9 out of 10 properties implies a probability of 0.9 that $B$ will possess any other property of $A$: “we can reasonably expect resemblance in the same proportion” (367). His only restriction has to do with sample size: we must be relatively knowledgeable about both $A$ and $B$. Mill saw no difficulty in using analogical reasoning to infer characteristics of newly discovered species of plants or animals, given our extensive knowledge of botany and zoology. But if the extent of unascertained properties of $A$ and $B$ is large, similarity in a small sample would not be a reliable guide; hence, Mill’s dismissal of Reid’s argument about life on other planets ( Example 2 ).

The sampling argument is presented in more explicit mathematical form by Harrod (1956). The key idea is that the known properties of $S$ (the source domain) may be considered a random sample of all $S$’s properties—random, that is, with respect to the attribute of also belonging to $T$ (the target domain). If the majority of known properties that belong to $S$ also belong to $T$, then we should expect most other properties of $S$ to belong to $T$, for it is unlikely that we would have come to know just the common properties. In effect, Harrod proposes a binomial distribution, modeling ‘random selection’ of properties on random selection of balls from an urn.

There are grave difficulties with Harrod’s and Mill’s analyses. One obvious difficulty is the counting problem : the ‘population’ of properties is poorly defined. How are we to count similarities and differences? The ratio of shared to total known properties varies dramatically according to how we do this. A second serious difficulty is the problem of bias : we cannot justify the assumption that the sample of known features is random. In the case of the urn, the selection process is arranged so that the result of each choice is not influenced by the agent’s intentions or purposes, or by prior choices. By contrast, the presentation of an analogical argument is always partisan. Bias enters into the initial representation of similarities and differences: an advocate of the argument will highlight similarities, while a critic will play up differences. The paradigm of repeated selection from an urn seems totally inappropriate. Additional variations of the sampling approach have been developed (e.g., Russell 1988), but ultimately these versions also fail to solve either the counting problem or the problem of bias.

4.2.3 Argument from past success

Section 3.6 discussed Steiner’s view that appeal to ‘Pythagorean’ analogies in physics “evokes, or should evoke, puzzlement” (1989: 454). Liston (2000) offers a possible response: physicists are entitled to use Pythagorean analogies on the basis of induction from their past success:

[The scientist] can admit that no one knows how [Pythagorean] reasoning works and argue that the very fact that similar strategies have worked well in the past is already reason enough to continue pursuing them hoping for success in the present instance. (200)

Setting aside familiar worries about arguments from success, the real problem here is to determine what counts as a similar strategy. In essence, that amounts to isolating the features of successful Pythagorean analogies. As we have seen (§2.4), nobody has yet provided a satisfactory scheme that characterizes successful analogical arguments, let alone successful Pythagorean analogical arguments.

An a priori approach traces the validity of a pattern of analogical reasoning, or of a particular analogical argument, to some broad and fundamental principle. Three such approaches will be outlined here.

The first is due to Keynes (1921). Keynes appeals to his famous Principle of the Limitation of Independent Variety, which he articulates as follows:

Armed with this Principle and some additional assumptions, Keynes is able to show that in cases where there is no negative analogy , knowledge of the positive analogy increases the (logical) probability of the conclusion. If there is a non-trivial negative analogy, however, then the probability of the conclusion remains unchanged, as was pointed out by Hesse (1966). Those familiar with Carnap’s theory of logical probability will recognize that in setting up his framework, Keynes settled on a measure that permits no learning from experience.

Hesse offers a refinement of Keynes’s strategy, once again along Carnapian lines. In her (1974), she proposes what she calls the Clustering Postulate : the assumption that our epistemic probability function has a built-in bias towards generalization. The objections to such postulates of uniformity are well-known (see Salmon 1967), but even if we waive them, her argument fails. The main objection here—which also applies to Keynes—is that a purely syntactic axiom such as the Clustering Postulate fails to discriminate between analogical arguments that are good and those that are clearly without value (according to Hesse’s own material criteria, for example).

A different a priori strategy, proposed by Bartha (2010), limits the scope of justification to analogical arguments that satisfy tentative criteria for ‘good’ analogical reasoning. The criteria are those specified by the articulation model ( §3.5 ). In simplified form, they require the existence of non-trivial positive analogy and no known critical disanalogy. The scope of Bartha’s argument is also limited to analogical arguments directed at establishing prima facie plausibility, rather than degree of probability.

Bartha’s argument rests on a principle of symmetry reasoning articulated by van Fraassen (1989: 236): “problems which are essentially the same must receive essentially the same solution.” A modal extension of this principle runs roughly as follows: if problems might be essentially the same, then they might have essentially the same solution. There are two modalities here. Bartha argues that satisfaction of the criteria of the articulation model is sufficient to establish the modality in the antecedent, i.e., that the source and target domains ‘might be essentially the same’ in relevant respects. He further suggests that prima facie plausibility provides a reasonable reading of the modality in the consequent, i.e., that the problems in the two domains ‘might have essentially the same solution.’ To call a hypothesis prima facie plausible is to elevate it to the point where it merits investigation, since it might be correct.

The argument is vulnerable to two sorts of concerns. First, there are questions about the interpretation of the symmetry principle. Second, there is a residual worry that this justification, like all the others, proves too much. The articulation model may be too vague or too permissive.

Arguably, the most promising available defense of analogical reasoning may be found in its application to case law (see Precedent and Analogy in Legal Reasoning ). Judicial decisions are based on the verdicts and reasoning that have governed relevantly similar cases, according to the doctrine of stare decisis (Levi 1949; Llewellyn 1960; Cross and Harris 1991; Sunstein 1993). Individual decisions by a court are binding on that court and lower courts; judges are obligated to decide future cases ‘in the same way.’ That is, the reasoning applied in an individual decision, referred to as the ratio decidendi , must be applied to similar future cases (see Example 10 ). In practice, of course, the situation is extremely complex. No two cases are identical. The ratio must be understood in the context of the facts of the original case, and there is considerable room for debate about its generality and its applicability to future cases. If a consensus emerges that a past case was wrongly decided, later judgments will distinguish it from new cases, effectively restricting the scope of the ratio to the original case.

The practice of following precedent can be justified by two main practical considerations. First, and above all, the practice is conservative : it provides a relatively stable basis for replicable decisions. People need to be able to predict the actions of the courts and formulate plans accordingly. Stare decisis serves as a check against arbitrary judicial decisions. Second, the practice is still reasonably progressive : it allows for the gradual evolution of the law. Careful judges distinguish bad decisions; new values and a new consensus can emerge in a series of decisions over time.

In theory, then, stare decisis strikes a healthy balance between conservative and progressive social values. This justification is pragmatic. It pre-supposes a common set of social values, and links the use of analogical reasoning to optimal promotion of those values. Notice also that justification occurs at the level of the practice in general; individual analogical arguments sometimes go astray. A full examination of the nature and foundations for stare decisis is beyond the scope of this entry, but it is worth asking the question: might it be possible to generalize the justification for stare decisis ? Is a parallel pragmatic justification available for analogical arguments in general?

Bartha (2010) offers a preliminary attempt to provide such a justification by shifting from social values to epistemic values. The general idea is that reasoning by analogy is especially well suited to the attainment of a common set of epistemic goals or values. In simple terms, analogical reasoning—when it conforms to certain criteria—achieves an excellent (perhaps optimal) balance between the competing demands of stability and innovation. It supports both conservative epistemic values, such as simplicity and coherence with existing belief, and progressive epistemic values, such as fruitfulness and theoretical unification (McMullin (1993) provides a classic list).

5. Beyond analogical arguments

As emphasized earlier, analogical reasoning takes in a great deal more than analogical arguments. In this section, we examine two broad contexts in which analogical reasoning is important.

The first, still closely linked to analogical arguments, is the confirmation of scientific hypotheses. Confirmation is the process by which a scientific hypothesis receives inductive support on the basis of evidence (see evidence , confirmation , and Bayes’ Theorem ). Confirmation may also signify the logical relationship of inductive support that obtains between a hypothesis $H$ and a proposition $E$ that expresses the relevant evidence. Can analogical arguments play a role, either in the process or in the logical relationship? Arguably yes (to both), but this role has to be delineated carefully, and several obstacles remain in the way of a clear account.

The second context is conceptual and theoretical development in cutting-edge scientific research. Analogies are used to suggest possible extensions of theoretical concepts and ideas. The reasoning is linked to considerations of plausibility, but there is no straightforward analysis in terms of analogical arguments.

How is analogical reasoning related to the confirmation of scientific hypotheses? The examples and philosophical discussion from earlier sections suggest that a good analogical argument can indeed provide support for a hypothesis. But there are good reasons to doubt the claim that analogies provide actual confirmation.

In the first place, there is a logical difficulty. To appreciate this, let us concentrate on confirmation as a relationship between propositions. Christensen (1999: 441) offers a helpful general characterization:

Some propositions seem to help make it rational to believe other propositions. When our current confidence in $E$ helps make rational our current confidence in $H$, we say that $E$ confirms $H$.

In the Bayesian model, ‘confidence’ is represented in terms of subjective probability. A Bayesian agent starts with an assignment of subjective probabilities to a class of propositions. Confirmation is understood as a three-place relation:

$E$ represents a proposition about accepted evidence, $H$ stands for a hypothesis, $K$ for background knowledge and $Pr$ for the agent’s subjective probability function. To confirm $H$ is to raise its conditional probability, relative to $K$. The shift from prior probability $Pr(H \mid K)$ to posterior probability $Pr(H \mid E \cdot K)$ is referred to as conditionalization on $E$. The relation between these two probabilities is typically given by Bayes’ Theorem (setting aside more complex forms of conditionalization):

For Bayesians, here is the logical difficulty: it seems that an analogical argument cannot provide confirmation. In the first place, it is not clear that we can encapsulate the information contained in an analogical argument in a single proposition, $E$. Second, even if we can formulate a proposition $E$ that expresses that information, it is typically not appropriate to treat it as evidence because the information contained in $E$ is already part of the background, $K$. This means that $E \cdot K$ is equivalent to $K$, and hence $Pr(H \mid E \cdot K) = Pr(H \mid K)$. According to the Bayesian definition, we don’t have confirmation. (This is a version of the problem of old evidence; see confirmation .) Third, and perhaps most important, analogical arguments are often applied to novel hypotheses $H$ for which the prior probability $Pr(H \mid K)$ is not even defined. Again, the definition of confirmation in terms of Bayesian conditionalization seems inapplicable.

If analogies don’t provide inductive support via ordinary conditionalization, is there an alternative? Here we face a second difficulty, once again most easily stated within a Bayesian framework. Van Fraassen (1989) has a well-known objection to any belief-updating rule other than conditionalization. This objection applies to any rule that allows us to boost credences when there is no new evidence. The criticism, made vivid by the tale of Bayesian Peter, is that these ‘ampliative’ rules are vulnerable to a Dutch Book . Adopting any such rule would lead us to acknowledge as fair a system of bets that foreseeably leads to certain loss. Any rule of this type for analogical reasoning appears to be vulnerable to van Fraassen’s objection.

There appear to be at least three routes to avoiding these difficulties and finding a role for analogical arguments within Bayesian epistemology. First, there is what we might call minimal Bayesianism . Within the Bayesian framework, some writers (Jeffreys 1973; Salmon 1967, 1990; Shimony 1970) have argued that a ‘seriously proposed’ hypothesis must have a sufficiently high prior probability to allow it to become preferred as the result of observation. Salmon has suggested that analogical reasoning is one of the most important means of showing that a hypothesis is ‘serious’ in this sense. If analogical reasoning is directed primarily towards prior probability assignments, it can provide inductive support while remaining formally distinct from confirmation, avoiding the logical difficulties noted above. This approach is minimally Bayesian because it provides nothing more than an entry point into the Bayesian apparatus, and it only applies to novel hypotheses. An orthodox Bayesian, such as de Finetti (de Finetti and Savage 1972, de Finetti 1974), might have no problem in allowing that analogies play this role.

The second approach is liberal Bayesianism : we can change our prior probabilities in a non-rule-based fashion . Something along these lines is needed if analogical arguments are supposed to shift opinion about an already existing hypothesis without any new evidence. This is common in fields such as archaeology, as part of a strategy that Wylie refers to as “mobilizing old data as new evidence” (Wylie and Chapman 2016: 95). As Hawthorne (2012) notes, some Bayesians simply accept that both initial assignments and ongoing revision of prior probabilities (based on plausibility arguments) can be rational, but

the logic of Bayesian induction (as described here) has nothing to say about what values the prior plausibility assessments for hypotheses should have; and it places no restrictions on how they might change.

In other words, by not stating any rules for this type of probability revision, we avoid the difficulties noted by van Fraassen. This approach admits analogical reasoning into the Bayesian tent, but acknowledges a dark corner of the tent in which rationality operates without any clear rules.

Recently, a third approach has attracted interest: analogue confirmation or confirmation via analogue simulation . As described in (Dardashti et al. 2017), the idea is as follows:

Our key idea is that, in certain circumstances, predictions concerning inaccessible phenomena can be confirmed via an analogue simulation in a different system. (57)

Dardashti and his co-authors concentrate on a particular example ( Example 17 ): ‘dumb holes’ and other analogues to gravitational black holes (Unruh 1981; Unruh 2008). Unlike real black holes, some of these analogues can be (and indeed have been) implemented and studied in the lab. Given the exact formal analogy between our models for these systems and our models of black holes, and certain important additional assumptions, Dardashti et al. make the controversial claim that observations made about the analogues provide evidence about actual black holes. For instance, the observation of phenomena analogous to Hawking radiation in the analogue systems would provide confirmation for the existence of Hawking radiation in black holes. In a second paper (Dardashti et al. 2018, Other Internet Resources), the case for confirmation is developed within a Bayesian framework.

The appeal of a clearly articulated mechanism for analogue confirmation is obvious. It would provide a tool for exploring confirmation of inaccessible phenomena not just in cosmology, but also in historical sciences such as archaeology and evolutionary biology, and in areas of medical science where ethical constraints rule out experiments on human subjects. Furthermore, as noted by Dardashti et al., analogue confirmation relies on new evidence obtained from the analogue system, and is therefore not vulnerable to the logical difficulties noted above.

Although the concept of analogue confirmation is not entirely new (think of animal testing, as in Example 8 ), the claims of (Dardashti et al. 2017, 2018 [Other Internet Resources]) require evaluation. One immediate difficulty for the black hole example: if we think in terms of ordinary analogical arguments, there is no positive analogy because, to put it simply, we have no basis of known similarities between a ‘dumb hole’ and a black hole. As Crowther et al. (2018, Other Internet Resources) argue, “it is not known if the particular modelling framework used in the derivation of Hawking radiation actually describes black holes in the first place. ” This may not concern Dardashti et al., since they claim that analogue confirmation is distinct from ordinary analogical arguments. It may turn out that analogue confirmation is different for cases such as animal testing, where we have a basis of known similarities, and for cases where our only access to the target domain is via a theoretical model.

In §3.6 , we saw that practice-based studies of analogy provide insight into the criteria for evaluating analogical arguments. Such studies also point to dynamical or programmatic roles for analogies, which appear to require evaluative frameworks that go beyond those developed for analogical arguments.

Knuttila and Loettgers (2014) examine the role of analogical reasoning in synthetic biology, an interdisciplinary field that draws on physics, chemistry, biology, engineering and computational science. The main role for analogies in this field is not the construction of individual analogical arguments but rather the development of concepts such as “noise” and “feedback loops”. Such concepts undergo constant refinement, guided by both positive and negative analogies to their analogues in engineered and physical systems. Analogical reasoning here is “transient, heterogeneous, and programmatic” (87). Negative analogies, seen as problematic obstacles for individual analogical arguments, take on a prominent and constructive role when the focus is theoretical construction and concept refinement.

Similar observations apply to analogical reasoning in its application to another cutting-edge field: emergent gravity. In this area of physics, distinct theoretical approaches portray gravity as emerging from different microstructures (Linneman and Visser 2018). “Novel and robust” features not present at the micro-level emerge in the gravitational theory. Analogies with other emergent phenomena, such as hydrodynamics and thermodynamics, are exploited to shape these proposals. As with synthetic biology, analogical reasoning is not directed primarily towards the formulation and assessment of individual arguments. Rather, its role is to develop different theoretical models of gravity.

These studies explore fluid and creative applications of analogy to shape concepts on the front lines of scientific research. An adequate analysis would certainly take us beyond the analysis of individual analogical arguments, which have been the focus of our attention. Knuttila and Loettgers (2014) are led to reject the idea that the individual analogical argument is the “primary unit” in analogical reasoning, but this is a debatable conclusion. Linneman and Visser (2018), for instance, explicitly affirm the importance of assessing the case for different gravitational models through “exemplary analogical arguments”:

We have taken up the challenge of making explicit arguments in favour of an emergent gravity paradigm… That arguments can only be plausibility arguments at the heuristic level does not mean that they are immune to scrutiny and critical assessment tout court. The philosopher of physics’ job in the process of discovery of quantum gravity… should amount to providing exactly this kind of assessments. (Linneman and Visser 2018: 12)

Accordingly, Linneman and Visser formulate explicit analogical arguments for each model of emergent gravity, and assess them using familiar criteria for evaluating individual analogical arguments. Arguably, even the most ambitious heuristic objectives still depend upon considerations of plausibility that benefit by being expressed, and examined, in terms of analogical arguments.

Achinstein, P., 1964, “Models, Analogies and Theories,” Philosophy of Science , 31: 328–349.
Agassi, J., 1964, “Discussion: Analogies as Generalizations,” Philosophy of Science , 31: 351–356.
–––, 1988, “Analogies Hard and Soft,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 401–19.
Aristotle, 1984, The Complete Works of Aristotle , J. Barnes (ed.), Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ashley, K.D., 1990, Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals , Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
Bailer-Jones, D., 2002, “Models, Metaphors and Analogies,” in Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Science , P. Machamer and M. Silberstein (eds.), 108–127, Cambridge: Blackwell.
Bartha, P., 2010, By Parallel Reasoning: The Construction and Evaluation of Analogical Arguments , New York: Oxford University Press.
Bermejo-Luque, L., 2012, “A unitary schema for arguments by analogy,” Informal Logic , 11(3): 161–172.
Biela, A., 1991, Analogy in Science , Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Black, M., 1962, Models and Metaphors , Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Campbell, N.R., 1920, Physics: The Elements , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
–––, 1957, Foundations of Science , New York: Dover.
Carbonell, J.G., 1983, “Learning by Analogy: Formulating and Generalizing Plans from Past Experience,” in Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach , vol. 1 , R. Michalski, J. Carbonell and T. Mitchell (eds.), 137–162, Palo Alto: Tioga.
–––, 1986, “Derivational Analogy: A Theory of Reconstructive Problem Solving and Expertise Acquisition,” in Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, vol. 2 , J. Carbonell, R. Michalski, and T. Mitchell (eds.), 371–392, Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann.
Carnap, R., 1980, “A Basic System of Inductive Logic Part II,” in Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability, vol. 2 , R.C. Jeffrey (ed.), 7–155, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Cartwright, N., 1992, “Aristotelian Natures and the Modern Experimental Method,” in Inference, Explanation, and Other Frustrations , J. Earman (ed.), Berkeley: University of California Press.
Christensen, D., 1999, “Measuring Confirmation,” Journal of Philosophy 96(9): 437–61.
Cohen, L. J., 1980, “Some Historical Remarks on the Baconian Conception of Probability,” Journal of the History of Ideas 41: 219–231.
Copi, I., 1961, Introduction to Logic, 2nd edition , New York: Macmillan.
Copi, I. and C. Cohen, 2005, Introduction to Logic, 12 th edition , Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Cross, R. and J.W. Harris, 1991, Precedent in English Law, 4 th ed. , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Currie, A., 2013, “Convergence as Evidence,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 64: 763–86.
–––, 2016, “Ethnographic analogy, the comparative method, and archaeological special pleading,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science , 55: 84–94.
–––, 2018, Rock, Bone and Ruin , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dardashti, R., K. Thébault, and E. Winsberg, 2017, “Confirmation via Analogue Simulation: What Dumb Holes Could Tell Us about Gravity,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 68: 55–89.
Darwin, C., 1903, More Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. I , F. Darwin (ed.), New York: D. Appleton.
Davies, T.R., 1988, “Determination, Uniformity, and Relevance: Normative Criteria for Generalization and Reasoning by Analogy,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 227–50.
Davies, T.R. and S. Russell, 1987, “A Logical Approach to Reasoning by Analogy,” in IJCAI 87: Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , J. McDermott (ed.), 264–70, Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
De Finetti, B., 1974, Theory of Probability, vols. 1 and 2 , trans. A. Machí and A. Smith, New York: Wiley.
De Finetti, B. and L.J. Savage, 1972, “How to Choose the Initial Probabilities,” in B. de Finetti, Probability, Induction and Statistics , 143–146, New York: Wiley.
Descartes, R., 1637/1954, The Geometry of René Descartes , trans. D.E. Smith and M.L. Latham, New York: Dover.
Douven, I. and T. Williamson, 2006, “Generalizing the Lottery Paradox,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 57: 755–779.
Eliasmith, C. and P. Thagard, 2001, “Integrating structure and meaning: a distributed model of analogical mapping,” Cognitive Science 25: 245–286.
Evans, T.G., 1968, “A Program for the Solution of Geometric-Analogy Intelligence-Test Questions,” in M.L. Minsky (ed.), 271–353, Semantic Information Processing , Cambridge: MIT Press.
Falkenhainer, B., K. Forbus, and D. Gentner, 1989/90, “The Structure-Mapping Engine: Algorithm and Examples,” Artificial Intelligence 41: 2–63.
Forbus, K, 2001, “Exploring Analogy in the Large,” in D. Gentner, K. Holyoak, and B. Kokinov (eds.) 2001, 23–58.
Forbus, K., R. Ferguson, and D. Gentner, 1994, “Incremental Structure-mapping,” in Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , A. Ram and K. Eiselt (eds.), 313–18, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Forbus, K., C. Riesbeck, L. Birnbaum, K. Livingston, A. Sharma, and L. Ureel, 2007, “A prototype system that learns by reading simplified texts,” in AAAI Spring Symposium on Machine Reading , Stanford University, California.
Forbus, K., J. Usher, A. Lovett, K. Lockwood, and J. Wetzel, 2008, “Cogsketch: Open domain sketch understanding for cognitive science research and for education,” in Proceedings of the Fifth Eurographics Workshop on Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling , Annecy, France.
Forbus, K., R. Ferguson, A. Lovett, and D. Gentner, 2017, “Extending SME to Handle Large-Scale Cognitive Modeling,” Cognitive Science , 41(5): 1152–1201.
Franklin, B., 1941, Benjamin Franklin’s Experiments , I.B. Cohen (ed.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Fraser, D., forthcoming, “The development of renormalization group methods for particle physics: Formal analogies between classical statistical mechanics and quantum field theory,” Synthese , first online 29 June 2018. doi:10.1007/s11229-018-1862-0
Galilei, G., 1610 [1983], The Starry Messenger , S. Drake (trans.) in Telescopes, Tides and Tactics , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gentner, D., 1983, “Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy,” Cognitive Science 7: 155–70.
Gentner, D., K. Holyoak, and B. Kokinov (eds.), 2001, The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science , Cambridge: MIT Press.
Gildenhuys, P., 2004, “Darwin, Herschel, and the role of analogy in Darwin’s Origin,” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences , 35: 593–611.
Gould, R.A. and P.J. Watson, 1982, “A Dialogue on the Meaning and Use of Analogy in Ethnoarchaeological Reasoning,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1: 355–381.
Govier, T., 1999, The Philosophy of Argument , Newport News, VA: Vale Press.
Guarini, M., 2004, “A Defence of Non-deductive Reconstructions of Analogical Arguments,” Informal Logic , 24(2): 153–168.
Hadamard, J., 1949, An Essay on the Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hájek, A., 2018, “Creating heuristics for philosophical creativity,” in Creativity and Philosophy , B. Gaut and M. Kieran (eds.), New York: Routledge, 292–312.
Halpern, J. Y., 2003, Reasoning About Uncertainty , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Harrod, R.F., 1956, Foundations of Inductive Logic , London: Macmillan.
Hawthorne, J., 2012, “Inductive Logic”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL= < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/logic-inductive/ >.
Helman, D.H. (ed.), 1988, Analogical Reasoning: perspectives of artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and philosophy , Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hempel, C.G., 1965, “Aspects of Scientific Explanation,” in Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science , 331–496, New York: Free Press.
Hesse, M.B., 1964, “Analogy and Confirmation Theory,” Philosophy of Science , 31: 319–327.
–––, 1966, Models and Analogies in Science , Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
–––, 1973, “Logic of discovery in Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory,” in Foundations of scientific method: the nineteenth century , R. Giere and R. Westfall (eds.), 86–114, Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
–––, 1974, The Structure of Scientific Inference , Berkeley: University of California Press.
–––, 1988, “Theories, Family Resemblances and Analogy,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 317–40.
Hofstadter, D., 1995, Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies , New York: BasicBooks (Harper Collins).
–––, 2001, “Epilogue: Analogy as the Core of Cognition,” in Gentner, Holyoak, and Kokinov (eds.) 2001, 499–538.
Hofstadter, D., and E. Sander, 2013, Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking , New York: Basic Books.
Holyoak, K. and P. Thagard, 1989, “Analogical Mapping by Constraint Satisfaction,” Cognitive Science , 13: 295–355.
–––, 1995, Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought , Cambridge: MIT Press.
Huber, F., 2009, “Belief and Degrees of Belief,” in F. Huber and C. Schmidt-Petri (eds.) 2009, 1–33.
Huber, F. and C. Schmidt-Petri, 2009, Degrees of Belief , Springer, 2009,
Hume, D. 1779/1947, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion , Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Hummel, J. and K. Holyoak, 1997, “Distributed Representations of Structure: A Theory of Analogical Access and Mapping,” Psychological Review 104(3): 427–466.
–––, 2003, “A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization,” Psychological Review 110: 220–264.
Hunter, D. and P. Whitten (eds.), 1976, Encyclopedia of Anthropology , New York: Harper & Row.
Huygens, C., 1690/1962, Treatise on Light , trans. S. Thompson, New York: Dover.
Indurkhya, B., 1992, Metaphor and Cognition , Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Jeffreys, H., 1973, Scientific Inference, 3rd ed. , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keynes, J.M., 1921, A Treatise on Probability , London: Macmillan.
Knuuttila, T., and A. Loettgers, 2014, “Varieties of noise: Analogical reasoning in synthetic biology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science , 48: 76–88.
Kokinov, B., K. Holyoak, and D. Gentner (eds.), 2009, New Frontiers in Analogy Research : Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Analogy ANALOGY-2009 , Sofia: New Bulgarian University Press.
Kraus, M., 2015, “Arguments by Analogy (and What We Can Learn about Them from Aristotle),” in Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory , F.H. van Eemeren and B. Garssen (eds.), Cham: Springer, 171–182. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21103-9_13
Kroes, P., 1989, “Structural analogies between physical systems,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 40: 145–54.
Kuhn, T.S., 1996, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , 3 rd edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuipers, T., 1988, “Inductive Analogy by Similarity and Proximity,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 299–313.
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson, 1980, Metaphors We Live By , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Leatherdale, W.H., 1974, The Role of Analogy, Model, and Metaphor in Science , Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing.
Lee, H.S. and Holyoak, K.J., 2008, “Absence Makes the Thought Grow Stronger: Reducing Structural Overlap Can Increase Inductive Strength,” in Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , V. Sloutsky, B. Love, and K. McRae (eds.), 297–302, Austin: Cognitive Science Society.
Lembeck, F., 1989, Scientific Alternatives to Animal Experiments , Chichester: Ellis Horwood.
Levi, E., 1949, An Introduction to Legal Reasoning , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Linnemann, N., and M. Visser, 2018, “Hints towards the emergent nature of gravity,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics , 30: 1–13.
Liston, M., 2000, “Critical Discussion of Mark Steiner’s The Applicability of Mathematics as a Philosophical Problem,” Philosophia Mathematica , 3(8): 190–207.
Llewellyn, K., 1960, The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and its Study , New York: Oceana.
Lloyd, G.E.R., 1966, Polarity and Analogy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Macagno, F., D. Walton and C. Tindale, 2017, “Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions,” Argumentation , 31: 221–243.
Maher, P., 2000, “Probabilities for Two Properties,” Erkenntnis , 52: 63–91.
Maier, C.L., 1981, The Role of Spectroscopy in the Acceptance of the Internally Structured Atom 1860–1920 , New York: Arno Press.
Maxwell, J.C., 1890, Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, Vol. I , W.D. Niven (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McKay, C.P., 1993, “Did Mars once have Martians?” Astronomy , 21(9): 26–33.
McMullin, Ernan, 1993, “Rationality and Paradigm Change in Science,” in World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science , P. Horwich (ed.), 55–78, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Mill, J.S., 1843/1930, A System of Logic , London: Longmans-Green.
Mitchell, M., 1993, Analogy-Making as Perception , Cambridge: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
Moore, B. N. and R. Parker, 1998, Critical Thinking, 5th ed. , Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
Nersessian, N., 2002, “Maxwell and ‘the Method of Physical Analogy’: Model-Based Reasoning, Generic Abstraction, and Conceptual Change,” in Reading Natural Philosophy , D. Malament (ed.), Chicago: Open Court.
–––, 2009, “Conceptual Change: Creativity, Cognition, and Culture,” in Models of Discovery and Creativity , J. Meheus and T. Nickles (eds.), Dordrecht: Springer 127–166.
Niiniluoto, I., 1988, “Analogy and Similarity in Scientific Reasoning,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 271–98.
Norton, J., 2010, “There Are No Universal Rules for Induction,” Philosophy of Science , 77: 765–777.
Ortony, A. (ed.), 1979, Metaphor and Thought , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oppenheimer, R., 1955, “Analogy in Science,” American Psychologist 11(3): 127–135.
Pietarinen, J., 1972, Lawlikeness, Analogy and Inductive Logic , Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Poincaré, H., 1952a, Science and Hypothesis , trans. W.J. Greenstreet, New York: Dover.
–––, 1952b, Science and Method , trans. F. Maitland, New York: Dover.
Polya, G., 1954, Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning , 2 nd ed. 1968, two vols., Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Prieditis, A. (ed.), 1988, Analogica , London: Pitman.
Priestley, J., 1769, 1775/1966, The History and Present State of Electricity, Vols. I and II , New York: Johnson. Reprint.
Quine, W.V., 1969, “Natural Kinds,” in Ontological Relativity and Other Essays , 114–138, New York: Columbia University Press.
Quine, W.V. and J.S. Ullian, 1970, The Web of Belief , New York: Random House.
Radin, M., 1933, “Case Law and Stare Decisis ,” Columbia Law Review 33 (February), 199.
Reid, T., 1785/1895, Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man . The Works of Thomas Reid, vol. 3, 8 th ed. , Sir William Hamilton (ed.), Edinburgh: James Thin.
Reiss, J., 2015, “A Pragmatist Theory of Evidence,” Philosophy of Science , 82: 341–62.
Reynolds, A.K. and L.O. Randall, 1975, Morphine and Related Drugs , Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Richards, R.A., 1997, “Darwin and the inefficacy of artificial selection,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science , 28(1): 75–97.
Robinson, D.S., 1930, The Principles of Reasoning, 2nd ed ., New York: D. Appleton.
Romeijn, J.W., 2006, “Analogical Predictions for Explicit Similarity,” Erkenntnis , 64(2): 253–80.
Russell, S., 1986, Analogical and Inductive Reasoning , Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
–––, 1988, “Analogy by Similarity,” in D.H. Helman (ed.) 1988, 251–269.
Salmon, W., 1967, The Foundations of Scientific Inference , Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
–––, 1990, “Rationality and Objectivity in Science, or Tom Kuhn Meets Tom Bayes,” in Scientific Theories (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science: Volume 14), C. Wade Savage (ed.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 175–204.
Sanders, K., 1991, “Representing and Reasoning about Open-Textured Predicates,” in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law , New York: Association of Computing Machinery, 137–144.
Schlimm, D., 2008, “Two Ways of Analogy: Extending the Study of Analogies to Mathematical Domains,” Philosophy of Science , 75: 178–200.
Shelley, C., 1999, “Multiple Analogies in Archaeology,” Philosophy of Science , 66: 579–605.
–––, 2003, Multiple Analogies in Science and Philosophy , Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Shimony, A., 1970, “Scientific Inference,” in The Nature and Function of Scientific Theories , R. Colodny (ed.), Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 79–172.
Snyder, L., 2006, Reforming Philosophy: A Victorian Debate on Science and Society , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Spohn, W., 2009, “A Survey of Ranking Theory,” in F. Huber and C. Schmidt-Petri (eds.) 2009, 185-228.
–––, 2012, The Laws of Belief: Ranking Theory and its Philosophical Applications , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stebbing, L.S., 1933, A Modern Introduction to Logic, 2nd edition , London: Methuen.
Steiner, M., 1989, “The Application of Mathematics to Natural Science,” Journal of Philosophy , 86: 449–480.
–––, 1998, The Applicability of Mathematics as a Philosophical Problem , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stepan, N., 1996, “Race and Gender: The Role of Analogy in Science,” in Feminism and Science , E.G. Keller and H. Longino (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 121–136.
Sterrett, S., 2006, “Models of Machines and Models of Phenomena,” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science , 20(March): 69–80.
Sunstein, C., 1993, “On Analogical Reasoning,” Harvard Law Review , 106: 741–791.
Thagard, P., 1989, “Explanatory Coherence,” Behavioral and Brain Science , 12: 435–502.
Timoshenko, S. and J. Goodier, 1970, Theory of Elasticity , 3rd edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Toulmin, S., 1958, The Uses of Argument , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Turney, P., 2008, “The Latent Relation Mapping Engine: Algorithm and Experiments,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , 33: 615–55.
Unruh, W., 1981, “Experimental Black-Hole Evaporation?,” Physical Review Letters , 46: 1351–3.
–––, 2008, “Dumb Holes: Analogues for Black Holes,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A , 366: 2905–13.
Van Fraassen, Bas, 1980, The Scientific Image , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
–––, 1984, “Belief and the Will,” Journal of Philosophy , 81: 235–256.
–––, 1989, Laws and Symmetry , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
–––, 1995, “Belief and the Problem of Ulysses and the Sirens,” Philosophical Studies , 77: 7–37.
Waller, B., 2001, “Classifying and analyzing analogies,” Informal Logic , 21(3): 199–218.
Walton, D. and C. Hyra, 2018, “Analogical Arguments in Persuasive and Deliberative Contexts,” Informal Logic , 38(2): 213–261.
Weitzenfeld, J.S., 1984, “Valid Reasoning by Analogy,” Philosophy of Science , 51: 137–49.
Woods, J., A. Irvine, and D. Walton, 2004, Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies , 2 nd edition, Toronto: Prentice-Hall.
Wylie, A., 1982, “An Analogy by Any Other Name Is Just as Analogical,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology , 1: 382–401.
–––, 1985, “The Reaction Against Analogy,” Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory , 8: 63–111.
Wylie, A., and R. Chapman, 2016, Evidential Reasoning in Archaeology , Bloomsbury Academic.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Other Internet Resources

Crowther, K., N. Linnemann, and C. Wüthrich, 2018, “ What we cannot learn from analogue experiments ,” online at arXiv.org.
Dardashti, R., S. Hartmann, K. Thébault, and E. Winsberg, 2018, “ Hawking Radiation and Analogue Experiments: A Bayesian Analysis ,” online at PhilSci Archive.
Norton, J., 2018. “ Analogy ”, unpublished draft, University of Pittsburgh.
Resources for Research on Analogy: a Multi-Disciplinary Guide (University of Windsor)
UCLA Reasoning Lab (UCLA)
Dedre Gentner’s publications (Northwestern University)
The Center for Research on Concepts and Cognition (Indiana University)

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Literary Devices

Last updated on: Jun 4, 2023

A Comprehensive Guide to Analogy In Literary Comparisons

By: Barbara P.

Reviewed By: Caleb S.

Published on: May 23, 2023

Sometimes, while reading a book, you feel words painting vivid pictures in your mind. Ever wondered how authors create such captivating stories? The secret lies in analogies.

Analogies are like special codes in the literature that help us understand and feel things in a new way. But they can be tricky to decode or even add to your own writing.

That’s what this guide is here to help you with. In this blog, we'll discover all about analogies in literature. We'll learn how they work, explore different types, and discover how they make stories come alive.

So, read on to sharpen your analysis and brighten your writing!

On this Page

Understanding Analogy

An analogy is a literary device that helps to explain or clarify something by comparing it to something else. It acts as a bridge , connecting two different ideas or concepts.

By using an analogy, writers take something familiar and use it to describe something more complex or abstract, making it easier for readers to understand.

For example, in George Orwell's novel "Animal Farm," the animals on the farm represent the political figures of the Russian Revolution. This analogy helps readers grasp the complex political dynamics by comparing them to simpler animal characters.

Need to know more about other literary devices? Have a read here to learn about a number of literary devices !

Distinction between Simile, Metaphor, and Analogy

While similes, metaphors, and analogies are forms of comparison, they have slight differences in their usage.

An analogy compares two things to help us understand or explain something. It connects unfamiliar ideas with familiar concepts.

Similes use " like " or " as " to compare things directly, while metaphors state that one thing is another .

In this quote, we see the use of simile , analogy , and metaphor :

Here is a quick review of the differences between the three literary devices:

Why Use Analogies in Literature

Analogies serve important purposes in literature, enhancing the overall reading experience.

Let's explore why authors use analogies:

Enhancing Understanding: Analogies make complex ideas more understandable by comparing them to something familiar, providing clarity and insight.
Creating Vivid Imagery: They add depth and richness to descriptions, painting vivid pictures in readers' minds and bringing the narrative to life.
Engaging Readers Emotionally: They evoke emotions and establish an emotional connection between the reader and the story, making it more captivating and memorable.
Making Complex Ideas Accessible: Analogies simplify complex ideas, making them more accessible to a wider audience and expanding understanding.
Stimulating Critical Thinking: They encourage critical thinking, prompting readers to draw connections, analyze patterns, and interpret underlying messages and themes.
Enhancing Creativity: They offer a creative outlet for authors to express their ideas in unique and imaginative ways, captivating readers' attention.

Using analogies skillfully can really add richness to your text, so read on to learn how you can use them.

How to Use Analogies

Analogies are valuable tools that can be used in various situations to enhance understanding and communication.

Here are some rules and tips to effectively use analogies:

Know Your Audience

Understand the knowledge, experiences, and background of your audience. Use analogies that resonate with them and align with their understanding.

Keep it Relevant

Ensure that your analogy is directly related to the topic or concept you're discussing. Avoid using analogies that are too far-fetched or unrelated, as they may confuse or distract your audience.

Use Simple and Familiar Comparisons

Choose analogies that are easy to understand and familiar to your audience. Everyday objects, common situations, or widely recognized phenomena work well to create relatable connections .

Highlight Key Similarities

Focus on the shared characteristics or behaviors between the analogy and the concept you're explaining. Emphasize the relevant aspects that help your audience grasp the intended meaning.

Make it Visual

Use descriptive language and vivid imagery to paint a clear picture in your audience's minds. Engage their senses by incorporating sensory details that enhance the visual representation of the analogy.

Provide Context

Set the stage by providing a brief context or explanation before presenting the analogy. This helps your audience connect the dots and understand how the analogy relates to the concept you're discussing.

Use Analogies Sparingly

While analogies can be powerful, avoid overusing them . Use them strategically to emphasize key points or to clarify complex ideas, but don't rely on them excessively.

How to Look for and Analyze Analogies

Works of literature are full of analogies. They add depth and meaning, forging connections between different elements.

Here are the steps to identify and analyze analogies in literary works:

Pay attention to comparisons: Be on the lookout for instances where the author compares one thing to another. These comparisons can be indirect, drawing parallels between different elements in the text.
Notice patterns and repeated imagery: Look for recurring symbols or images throughout the text. These can often indicate the presence of analogies and provide insights into the author's intended meaning.
Consider thematic elements: Analyze the central themes and ideas explored in the literature. Analogies are often used to reinforce themes, so identifying the main themes can help in recognizing analogical connections.
Engage with the text: Actively engage by asking questions and making connections. Look for similarities, parallels, or shared characteristics between different elements within the text.

Now, that you’ve learned how to identify analogies, here’s how you can analyze their role in the text:

Identify shared characteristics: Once you've identified an analogy, focus on the elements being compared and find the similar qualities between them. This will help you understand the purpose of the analogy and its intended meaning.
Consider the context: Analyze the surrounding context and the overall narrative of the literature. The analogy should fit within the broader storyline and contribute to the themes and messages conveyed by the author.
Reflect on emotional impact: Consider the emotional impact of the analogy on the reader. How does it make you feel? What emotions does it evoke? This can provide insights into the intended effect the author wants to achieve and deepen your understanding of the analogy's purpose.
Explore deeper meanings: Look beyond the surface-level comparison and consider the deeper meanings and implications of the analogy. Think about the layers of symbolism and metaphorical associations that the analogy may carry.

Analyzing is a key practice in any literature assignment. Read here to get an insight into literary analysis !

Let's take a closer look at a literary quote and analyze it to reveal its deeper meanings:

So, the next time you delve into a captivating literary work, keep an eye out for the analogies. Also, remember to include this device in your writings to give them a literary boost!

But if you still feel a little lost about using and analyzing analogies, you can reach out to our professional essay writing service!

At our service, our literature specialist writers can help you with any literature assignment. Whether you need help analyzing analogies or any other literary device, our team can do it all.

You can always rely on our team to provide you with assignments that will get you top scores every time.

Just ask us to “ write my essay ” and we’ll deliver!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Was This Blog Helpful?

Keep reading.

Exploring Literary Devices: A Beginner's Guide

Learn How to Use Allusion in Writing with Examples

Allegory Explained: Meaning, Types, & Examples

Euphemism: A Comprehensive Guide

The Alliteration Handbook - Everything You Need to Know

Satire Explained -Types, Examples, and Tips

Hyperbole As A Literary Device: Types & Examples

Sounding Out Onomatopoeia: A Beginner's Guide

Oxymoron: A Comprehensive Guide for Beginners

Imagery in Writing: Examples of Imagery as a Literary Device

Guide to Metaphor - Definition and Examples

The Art of Antithesis: Elevate Your Writing with Contrast

Symbolism: Definition, Usage, and Examples in Literature and Beyond!

Chiasmus - A Complete Guide with Examples

How Foreshadowing Sets the Tone and Keeps Readers Hooked

A Comprehensive Guide to Personification with Examples

Colloquialism in Writing: Speak Your Reader's Language

Puns in Writing: The Art of Verbal Juggling

What is Mood in literature? Definition, Usage and Examples

I. What is an Analogy?

An analogy is a literary technique in which two unrelated objects are compared for their shared qualities. Unlike a simile or a metaphor, an analogy is not a figure of speech, though the three are often quite similar. Instead, analogies are strong rhetorical devices used to make rational arguments and support ideas by showing connections and comparisons between dissimilar things.

II. Examples of Analogy

Analogies are commonly used to show important comparisons and make solid arguments. Here are some examples:

Every choice you make is like spinning the wheel of fortune—sometimes you will get the result that you desire, while other times you will end up with something you always hoped to avoid.

Raising children requires the same dedication you would give to a garden. Nurture them, feed them, introduce them to both light and dark, and have patience; and soon you will see them grow into blooming wonders.

In the first example, the writer could have said “Every choice has a different consequence.” But like similes, analogies make associations between things that wouldn’t usually be compared (like choices to wheels of fortune and children to gardens). These comparisons create better descriptions and sensory images in the minds of readers. On the other hand, analogies are more elaborate and informational than similes or metaphors , providing support for the comparisons made rather than just stating them as simple truths. As you can see, the second example explains how children and gardens have similar qualities because they require similar growing conditions.

Photosynthesis does for plants what digesting food does for animals. It is the process that lets them convert nutrients into the fuel needed to grow and develop.

You may also see analogies that compare relationships rather than individual things. But the analogy still works in the same way; it explains how the relationships share a similar quality of transforming nutrients.

III. Types of Analogy

A. literal analogy.

In a literal analogy, you are saying that one thing really is similar to another. This is the kind of analogy that you would draw if you wanted to make an argument or persuasion. For example, when scientists test a new medicine on laboratory mice, they are arguing that mice and humans really are similar in medically significant ways. Therefore, as the argument goes, if a medicine works on mice, it should also work on humans (or at least it’s ready for human testing).

b. Figurative Analogy

In a figurative analogy, you’re simply drawing a comparison between two unrelated things to highlight a certain characteristic; you’re not necessarily saying that the things are truly similar . Take, for example, the wheel of fortune example. If life were truly similar to a wheel of fortune you would have a lot less control over our choices and the consequences would be unpredictable.

IV. The Importance of Analogy

As mentioned, analogies are used to make logical arguments and comparisons. Here are a few ways writers might use analogies:

a. Make abstract ideas more concrete

There are some people – like teachers, professors, and technical writers – who explain difficult ideas for a living. It’s a tough job! One way to make it easier is to draw analogies to things your readers or students are already familiar with. For example, a biology teacher might explain the immune system by saying, “What policemen do in a town, white blood cells do inside the body.”

b. Add depth and feeling to an image

Consider this example:

She felt like a raft floating in the middle of an dark, endless ocean. Like her, the raft was was floating along, alone, worn out, and unable to reach a steady place in which to settle.

Notice what a powerful image this descriptions brings to mind. Without the analogy, the author would just be saying “She was lonely and exhausted.” How boring! The analogy makes her emotions seem dark and overwhelming – just as the ocean at night.

c. Making a persuasive argument

Obviously, this is rare in poetry and fiction, where making an argument isn’t the point. But in essays , literary analysis, and many other fields, persuasion is the name of the game – and analogy can be a powerful tool for that purpose. It’s especially useful when you want to show the flawed reasoning in another person’s argument:

Person A : Lots of history’s dictators started as soldiers; therefore, soldiers should never become politicians because they’ll end up as dictators.

Person B : But that doesn’t make sense! It’s like saying “lots of alcoholics started out by drinking milk; therefore no one should ever drink milk.” Just as there are many milk-drinkers who don’t become alcoholics, there are also many soldiers who don’t become dictators .

Notice how Person B has employed a clever analogy to show that Person A is making a faulty argument.

V. Examples of Analogy in Literature

They crowded very close about him, with their hands always on him in a careful, caressing grip, as though all the while feeling him to make sure he was there. It was like men handling a fish which is still alive and may jump back into the water. (George Orwell, A Hanging)

In this passage, Orwell is describing the crowd’s reaction to seeing a man hanged. One interpretation of the analogies is that they create a supernatural feeling by subtly suggesting the possibility that the dead man may simply disappear, or may suddenly come back to life.

What gunpowder did for war the printing press has done for the mind. (Wendell Phillips, Public Opinion on the Abolition Question)

Gunpowder revolutionized war and brought down old hierarchies and strategies – after the introduction of the gun, war would never be the same. Similarly, the invention of the printing press allowed books and newspapers to reach vast audiences that otherwise had no access to the written word. This revolutionized education and made possible an era of widespread literacy and democratic thought.

“Evolution is a blind giant who rolls a snowball down a hill. The ball is made of flakes—circumstances. They contribute to the mass without knowing it. They adhere without intention, and without foreseeing what is to result. When they see the result they marvel at the monster ball and wonder how the contriving of it came to be originally thought out and planned. Whereas there was no such planning, there was only a law: the ball once started, all the circumstances that happened to lie in its path would help to build it, in spite of themselves.” (Mark Twain, Tales of Wonder)

Here, Twain uses an analogy to speak about evolution, comparing it to a giant rolling a snowball down the hill–the results are quite unpredictable, but inevitable.

VI. Examples of Analogy in Pop Culture

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); “My momma always said “life is like a box of chocolates – you never know what you’re gonna get!” (Forrest Gump)

Here, Forrest Gump shares a very memorable analogy, beginning with the simile “life was like a box of chocolates.” But, this is an analogy because it gives further support and explanation for the comparison, showing that life has many choices and surprises, just like a box of chocolate.

Oh, he ‘loved to laugh?’ Well, that doesn’t tell you anything! That’s like saying , ‘He hungered for food! (Patton Oswald, Obituaries)

This is a humorous version of argument by analogy. Oswald, a standup comedian, is poking fun at articles about him by comparing that statement to something obviously commonplace, showing that the argument that he “loved to laugh” is about as strong as saying he gets hungry for food.

People are like stained-glass windows. They sparkle and shine when the sun is out, but when the darkness sets in, their true beauty is revealed only if there is a light from within. (Quote by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross in The Leader’s Digest by Jim Clemmer, 2003)

In this quote, the groundbreaking psychiatrist Elizabeth Kübler-Ross (well-known for her 5 Stages of Grief) gives an analogy about the human condition, saying that people, like stained-glass, work differently in situations of light and dark.

VII. Related Terms

People often confuse analogies with similes and metaphors, which are both figures of speech. However, they are actually very different, specifically because an analogy is a rhetorical device, not a figure of speech. While similes and metaphors are generally quite short and simple, analogies are more elaborate and explanatory, because they support arguments.

A figure of speech that makes comparisons using explicit “comparing” words such as like or as. So when you see like or as underlined in this article, you know it’s an example of a simile.

“What light through yonder window breaks? It is the East, and Juliet is like the sun!”

“…It is the East, and Juliet is as radiant as the sun!”

A figure of speech where unrelated things are compared – basically, it’s just a simile with the “like” or “as” removed.

“What light through yonder window breaks? It is the East, and Juliet is the sun!” (William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet)

It’s important to remember that a metaphor is not a kind of analogy – it’s a different figure of speech altogether. However, it’s very similar to analogy in that they both depend on some kind of similarity between two different objects.

Example of an analogy versus simile and metaphor:

Simile : Life is like a garden.

Metaphor : Life is a garden.

Analogy: Life is just like a garden–it is ever growing and changing, needing care and dedication, and always filled with beautiful surprises.

Again, it’s important to remember that metaphors and similes are figures of speech, while analogies are NOT. However, they are very similar to analogies in that they both depend on some kind of similarity between two different objects.

List of Terms

Alliteration
Amplification
Anachronism
Anthropomorphism
Antonomasia
APA Citation
Aposiopesis
Autobiography
Bildungsroman
Characterization
Circumlocution
Cliffhanger
Comic Relief
Connotation
Deus ex machina
Deuteragonist
Doppelganger
Double Entendre
Dramatic irony
Equivocation
Extended Metaphor
Figures of Speech
Flash-forward
Foreshadowing
Intertextuality
Juxtaposition
Literary Device
Malapropism
Onomatopoeia
Parallelism
Pathetic Fallacy
Personification
Point of View
Polysyndeton
Protagonist
Red Herring
Rhetorical Device
Rhetorical Question
Science Fiction
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Synesthesia
Turning Point
Understatement
Urban Legend
Verisimilitude
Essay Guide
Cite This Website

What is Analogy (3 Types) and How to Write One?

Figurative Language
Updated on Nov 12, 2023

In this post, we’ll cover analogy in depth, including the most important part: how to write different types of analogies.

What is an analogy?

Analogy is a rhetorical device (that’s a broader umbrella than figure of speech) of comparison that explains a less-known or abstract idea by saying that it is similar (and not same as, which is the case in metaphors) to a well-known or concrete idea, which makes it easier to understand the less-known. The two ideas are quite unlike, but they point to a common message. Example:

Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. Winston Churchill

Look at how this analogy explains why criticism is necessary (primary idea, also called tenor) by comparing it with something we know, pain in our body (idea being compared to, also called vehicle). The two ideas are quite unlike – criticism and pain – but they point to the common message that both are necessary for us. Humans have been using this method of explaining – comparing with something that is easier to understand – for thousands of years. Analogies, besides comparing, can also contrast two unlike ideas to explain (see ‘Analogy 1’ later in the post).

More resources on analogy:

75+ examples of analogy , some of which have been taken from current events to give you a flavor of how they’re used in real-world writing
Confused between metaphor, simile, and metaphor? Learn how the three are different

Whereas metaphors and similes merely show (or build images in the mind of the reader) comparison between two unlike things and do so more for stylistic purpose, analogies go a step further. They also explain the comparison. They build arguments. That’s why analogies are richer and more complex than metaphors and similes, and therefore generally are more elaborate.

Hence, the two key points in analogies are:

Use of a well-known or concrete thing as a comparison point to explain a less-known or abstract thing
Purpose is explanation and not stylistic effect

To elaborate on the two points, there is a reason why we often say ‘let me give an analogy’ while explaining something complex. We give an analogy to explain through a comparison with well-known thing. If it wasn’t well-know, what’s the point in using it as a comparison point. That’s why using well-known to explain less-known is such an inalienable part of analogies. (It’s part of similes too but isn’t emphasized as much.)

We rarely say ‘let me give a simile or metaphor’ when explaining something. In a way, explanation naturally lends to analogies.

For the purpose of understanding analogies, we can divide them into three broad types:

1. Analogies with proportionate relationship

You would recall analogies such as these from aptitude tests:

Lisbon : Portugal :: _____ : Finland

On : Off :: Bright : _____

In the first analogy, the first pair bears the same relationship (capital city : country) with the second. So is the case in the second analogy (antonyms).

You can reduce above analogies in mathematical form to text. The first one has been done in two different ways:

Lisbon is to Portugal as Helsinki is to Finland.

What Lisbon is to Portugal, Helsinki is to Finland.

This is essentially of the form A is to B as C is to D . The word analogy , in fact, is derived from the Greek word analogia , which means proportionate relationship between two pairs of things, exactly the form mentioned in the previous sentence. Few analogies of this type:

I’m as uncomfortable in taking a swim as a lion is in taking a climb to a tree.

MTV is to music as KFC is to chicken. Lewis Black

College football is a sport that bears the same relation to education that bullfighting does to agriculture. Elbert Hubbard

Because of its structure, these analogies are easy to identify and easy to write. However, life often gets complicated. So do analogies when they extend beyond the formulaic first type.

2. Analogies building on similes

The second type of analogies are quite similar to similes, often using similar comparison words such as like and as . And that’s why these analogies are often confused with similes. Analogies, however, go a step further and explain:

Like the deadly fog that envelopes the region, affecting normal life for many days, global warming has emerged as the envelope of the entire planet, wreaking untold harm on the earth’s inhabitants.

It has a simile-like structure, but it’s an analogy because it explains, and such explanations can extend to few sentences and even paragraphs. This analogy uses a well-known item ( fog in a region ) as a comparison point to explain a less-known item ( global warming ). Simile for the above analogy would be:

Global warming has enveloped the entire planet like the deadly fog envelopes the region.

But some are too close to call as simile or analogy:

Doing business without advertising is like winking at a girl in the dark. You know what you are doing, but nobody else does. Stuart H. Britt

Some would call it simile, some analogy. I believe it’s arguably a simile because the first sentence may leave people hanging without the explanation of second. In other words, if explanation is essential to understanding the simile, then that explanation is part of that simile.

Note that similes and metaphors too use a well-known or concrete thing to explain less-known or abstract thing, but they don’t stretch into explanation the way analogies do.

3. Analogies with no particular pattern

Speaking from my experience on analogies, most of our analogical thoughts naturally drift towards a free style, no particular pattern. An example:

All of sub-Saharan Africa receives just over $1 billion in economic aid. If everyone in the United States gave up one soft drink a month, we could double our current aid to Africa. If everyone gave up one movie a year, we could double our current aid to Africa and Asia.

This one, taken from the book Made to Stick , is not in the mould of a simile or a proportionate relationship. It uses a well-known item twice ( giving up one soft drink a month / giving up one movie a year ) as a comparison point to explain a less-known item twice ( double current aid to Africa / double current aid to Africa and Asia ). Note that soft drink and movie are much more concrete, and therefore they make it easy for people to visualize how low the economic aid is. (The data is from 2003.)

What if the same information was conveyed by this statement?

All of sub-Saharan Africa receives just over $1 billion in economic aid.

This statement doesn’t reveal much and may even be taken as significant aid by some. The elaborate response, through an analogy, however puts the aid amount in perspective. (The authors also mention the real situation: “The truth is that we spend less than 1 percent [of budget], the lowest of any industrialized nation.”)

Note that the analogies we discussed in the second type, especially the one on doing business without advertising, also serve some stylistic purpose through their form, which is similar to a simile. But the third type of analogies has little stylistic purpose. It’s purely for explaining, the soul of analogies.

How to write analogies?

Writing first type of analogy is all about thinking two proportionate ideas and then putting them into words. Remember, A is to B as C is to D? You’ve seen analogies of this type earlier in the post.

Writing second type of analogies is also somewhat formulaic: think of a simile and explain it. You’ve seen analogies of this type too earlier in the post.

Writing third type is more of a free-flowing comparison explaining less-known through well-known. I’ve thought of or written quite a few analogies, and almost all of them fall into this category. This type, in my opinion, is in line with our natural analogical thought process. How to go about it? Decide a tenor, think of a striking vehicle, and let your comparison flow freely. You don’t have to necessarily fit it into any form. You’ve seen an analogy of this type from the book Made to Stick . Here are four more of third type:

Here is an analogy I wrote after seeing, on National Geographic channel, how two leopard cubs escaped wild dogs.

While their mother was away, the two leopard cubs escaped wild dogs by remaining standstill, camouflaging perfectly with the rocks in the background. Clearly, the two cubs, barely two months old, had been learning only what matters in the real world – escaping predators (and hunting few months down the line). In contrast, we humans learn myriad of subjects in school and college, of which only a tiny portion matters in the real world.

This analogy contrasts, rather than compares, two items. Note that this analogy doesn’t follow any simile-like structure. It’s more a free-flowing explanation. You can apply the test of two key points we covered earlier and see for yourself how this analogy fits in.

Are you surprised at the length of the analogy? Don’t be. Because analogies explain, they can be expanded into several sentences, paragraphs, or even an entire article.

Here is another one I wrote, comparing two items:

If you want to do really well in career, one option is to be exceptionally good in one skill, maybe entering top 0.1 percent in that field. But that’s hard. Very, very. Alternatively, you can be in top 20 percent of few useful skills , including your core technical skill, and do really well in your career. For example, if you’re a software engineer, you can also learn to speak well in public forums and write well. If you do that, you’ll move from the club of, say, 100,000 software engineers with technical skill to a club of 100-odd with few additional skills.

The dramatic drop-off in the size of the pool you see when you acquire new skills can be explained through a similar drop-off in number of planets in the universe with intelligent life (like human beings).

There are many barriers to be crossed before a planet can bear intelligent life. First, the planet should be just at the right distance from its sun. Second, the planet should hold complex organic molecules, amino acids, water, etc. for life to develop from non-life. Third, the planet’s climate should hold steady for billions of years, and this could be completely accidental like it has happened with earth (our moon is unusually large for the size of our planet, and this size happens to be just perfect for a stable climate). And there are many more barriers. If the probability of crossing each of these barriers is multiplied, ours is likely the only planet in the universe with intelligent life despite there being hundreds of billions of galaxies, with each galaxy housing trillions of planets.

Participate in a short survey

If you’re a learner or teacher of English language, you can help improve website’s content for the visitors through a short survey.

Analogy 3 and 4

Analogies can be expanded to an entire article. This 1,200+ word article , for example, explains investing in stocks through an analogy with surfing, a more well-known and concrete phenomenon. If this long analogy is to be converted to a simile, it would read: Stock markets are like surfing.

To give another example, this 1,500+ word article explains how Covid-19 is a reflection of society through an analogy with X-ray. If this long analogy is to be converted to a simile, it would read: COVID-19 is like an X-ray of society. This in fact is the title of the article.

When an analogy gets long, it is easily distinguishable from its simile. The confusion arises only when both are short. I’ve written an analogy for this confusion:

Eggs of some birds look similar like an analogy and simile look similar when short. But their hatchlings look very different like an analogy and simile look very different when explanation kicks in.

Anil is the person behind content on this website, which is visited by 3,000,000+ learners every year. He writes on most aspects of English Language Skills. More about him here:

“He’s as strong as an ox” and “Navigating her emotions is like walking through a maze” are examples of analogies, a common method of comparison in the English language. Analogies are not only prevalent in literature and writing but also in everyday speech, serving as an effective tool for communication. They involve comparing two different things or ideas, which helps clarify or emphasize a point. This literary term, known as an analogy, encompasses various types of comparisons, making it a key element in both formal and informal expression.

Like any other literary analysis sample device, Analogy is used in enhancing the meaning of a composition and is also used in helping the readers in creating a visual image in their minds as well as relationships goals and connections when they would read something difficult or sensitive by comparing one thing to the other. Analogies are often used in thesis , essay writing , report writing , and even in speeches .

What is an Analogy? – Definition An analogy is a comparison between two different things, intended to highlight some form of similarity. It’s a linguistic technique used to explain a new or complex idea by relating it to something familiar. Analogies are often used in teaching, writing, and speaking to make concepts easier to understand. They draw parallels that help people visualize and grasp the essence of the subjects being compared, thereby enhancing comprehension and retention.

Examples of Word Analogies

Analogies are crucial in language and thinking, comparing different concepts to enhance understanding. They are used in education to simplify complex ideas, in standardized tests to assess reasoning skills, and in job interviews to evaluate problem-solving abilities. Additionally, analogies enrich literature and daily communication. Examples like comparing pens to brushes or the sun to planets demonstrate how analogies illuminate various subjects, making them more accessible and relatable.

Relationship in First Pair : A pen is a tool used for writing.
Application to Second Pair : Similarly, a brush is a tool, but it is used for painting.
The analogy connects the function of each tool with its primary action.
Relationship in First Pair : The sun is a central part of our solar system.
Application to Second Pair : In a broader scope, a planet is part of a galaxy, which is a larger system of celestial bodies.
This analogy scales from a smaller celestial relationship (sun and solar system) to a larger one (planet and galaxy).
Relationship in First Pair : A teacher is the guiding authority in a classroom.
Application to Second Pair : Similarly, a captain is the guiding authority on a ship.
The analogy compares the roles of authority and guidance in different settings.
Relationship in First Pair : A clock is an instrument used to measure and indicate time.
Application to Second Pair : In a similar vein, a thermometer is an instrument used to measure and indicate temperature.
This analogy connects the function of measuring and indicating specific elements (time and temperature) with their respective instruments.
Relationship in First Pair : A book is an individual item that is part of a collection in a library.
Application to Second Pair : Similarly, a piece of art is an individual item that forms part of a collection in a gallery.
The analogy shows the relationship of individual items (books, art) as components of larger collections (library, gallery).
Leaf : Tree :: Wave : Ocean It compares the part-to-whole relationship of a leaf to a tree and a wave to an ocean.
Author : Novel :: Composer : Symphony This analogy highlights the relationship between an author and their creation, a novel, to a composer and their creation, a symphony.
Doctor : Hospital :: Teacher : School It parallels the role of a doctor in a hospital to that of a teacher in a school.
Key : Piano :: String : Guitar This analogy compares the function of a key on a piano to a string on a guitar.
Nurse : Healthcare :: Lawyer : Law Here, the analogy shows the relationship of a nurse to the field of healthcare and a lawyer to the field of law.

More Analogy Examples for You to Solve

Owl : Night :: Eagle : _______ (Hint: Consider the time of day each bird is most active.)
Library : Books :: Museum : _______ (Hint: Think about what a museum houses.)
Novelist : Words :: Painter : _______ (Hint: Focus on the primary medium used by each artist.)
Teacher : Educate :: Chef : _______ (Hint: What is the primary action a chef performs?)
Fish : School :: Wolf : _______ (Hint: Consider the term for a group of these animals.)
Piano : Music :: Telescope : _______ (Hint: What does a telescope help us explore?)
Rain : Cloud :: Lava : _______ (Hint: Where does lava originate?)
Heart : Circulate :: Lungs : _______ (Hint: Think about the primary function of lungs.)
Leaf : Photosynthesis :: Root : _______ (Hint: Consider the main function of roots in a plant.)
Baker : Bakery :: Librarian : _______ (Hint: Where does a librarian work?)
Clock : Time :: Scale : _______
Ocean : Saltwater :: Lake : _______
Flower : Garden :: Book : _______
Knife : Cut :: Screwdriver : _______
Fire : Heat :: Snow : _______
Poet : Poem :: Musician : _______
Bird : Nest :: Bee : _______
Tree : Oxygen :: Sun : _______
Actor : Stage :: Athlete : _______
Shoe : Foot :: Glove : _______
Phone : Call :: Computer : _______
Rain : Umbrella :: Sun : _______
Leaf : Green :: Sky : _______
Baker : Bread :: Winemaker : _______
Painter : Portrait :: Writer : _______
Doctor : Patient :: Teacher : _______
Fisherman : Fish :: Miner : _______
Keyboard : Type :: Mouse : _______
Car : Garage :: Airplane : _______
Map : Location :: Calendar : _______

Examples of Analogies for Critical Thinking

Just as a garden is a space where flowers grow and flourish, the mind is a space where ideas are cultivated and developed. This analogy emphasizes the nurturing and growth aspects in both scenarios.
A book opens the door to knowledge, much like a key unlocks a door. This analogy highlights the unlocking and revealing nature of a book, providing access to new information and understanding.
A telescope enables us to see distant stars, while a microscope allows us to view tiny bacteria. This analogy draws a parallel between the tools we use to explore vastly different scales of our universe, from the vast to the microscopic.
Just as a foundation provides stability and support for a building, roots offer support and nourishment to a tree. This analogy compares the underlying support structures in architecture and nature.
In poetry, words are woven together to create emotional and intellectual art, just as colors are blended in a painting to create a visual masterpiece. This analogy compares the elements of creation in different forms of art.
A chef uses a recipe to create a dish, just like a composer uses a musical score to create a symphony.
An author crafts stories with a pen as a sculptor shapes sculptures with a chisel.
Fire is a source of warmth, as ice is a source of coolness.
A clock measures time like a thermometer measures temperature.
Trees produce oxygen, and clouds produce rain.

More Examples for you to Solve:

Helmet : Head :: Gloves : _______ (Hint: Consider what gloves protect.)
Sponge : Absorb :: Sieve : _______ (Hint: Think about what a sieve does with liquids.)
Caterpillar : Butterfly :: Tadpole : _______ (Hint: Consider the lifecycle transformation.)
Magnet : Attract :: Repellent : _______ (Hint: Think of the opposite action of attracting.)
Flashlight : Darkness :: Air Conditioner : _______ (Hint: What does an air conditioner alleviate?)
Furnace : Heat :: Refrigerator : _______ (Hint: Think about what a refrigerator preserves.)
Anchor : Ship :: Brakes : _______ (Hint: Consider what brakes do to a vehicle.)
Recipe : Dish :: Blueprint : _______ (Hint: What is created using a blueprint?)
Vaccine : Disease :: Fertilizer : _______ (Hint: Think about what fertilizer promotes.)
Lighthouse : Ships :: Traffic Light : _______ (Hint: Consider what traffic lights guide.)
Archive : Documents :: Museum : _______
Rudder : Direction :: Engine : _______
Thermometer : Temperature :: Barometer : _______
Author : Story :: Composer : _______
Nest : Bird :: Den : _______
Broom : Sweep :: Hose : _______
Window : Light :: Dam : _______
Dew : Morning :: Frost : _______
Key : Lock :: Code : _______
Easel : Painter :: Anvil : _______

Analogy Examples in Sentence

Life is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you’re going to get. This analogy compares the unpredictability of life with the surprise of picking a chocolate from an assorted box.
The heart of a car is its engine. This draws a parallel between the essential role of the heart in the human body and the engine in a vehicle.
A good book is a magic gateway into another world. Here, the transformative power of reading is likened to a portal leading to new, undiscovered realms.
The classroom was a zoo. This analogy suggests the noisy and chaotic nature of the classroom, similar to the lively environment of a zoo.
Her eyes were windows to her soul. This sentence compares eyes to windows, implying that they reveal deep emotions or the essence of a person.
Time is a thief. This analogy implies that time steals moments from our lives, much like a thief takes away possessions.
The computer in the modern age is like a pen in the past. This draws a comparison between the role of computers today in communication and creation, and the role of the pen in earlier times.
The moon is a ghostly galleon tossed upon cloudy seas. This vividly portrays the moon as a ghostly ship sailing across the sky, with clouds as its sea.
The world is a stage, and we are merely players. This famous analogy from Shakespeare suggests that life is like a play, and everyone has a role to perform.
Watching the show was like walking through a dream. This suggests the surreal, dream-like quality of the show, likened to the experience of walking through a dream.

Examples of Analogy in Literature

Analogy is a common literary device used by authors to draw comparisons between two different things, often to highlight a particular theme or idea. Here are some examples of analogy in literature:

This famous analogy compares the world to a stage and life to a play, suggesting that our lives are structured like a theatrical performance, with different roles and acts.
Orwell uses farm animals to represent historical figures and social classes, drawing parallels between the farm’s descent into tyranny and the history of Soviet communism.
Here, the prejudice and racism in Maycomb are compared to a disease, suggesting they are both harmful and spread uncontrollably.
The diverging paths symbolize life’s different options and directions, and the choice of path represents a decision that shapes one’s future.
In this analogy, experiences are likened to physical parts of a person, suggesting that they become integral to one’s identity.

Types of Analogy

Literal Analogy : Compares two similar things or classes of things that have the same relationship. For example, “Just as a sword is the weapon of a warrior, a pen is the weapon of a writer.”
Figurative Analogy : Involves a comparison between two things that are different in nature, often used to explain a concept or to persuade. For instance, comparing the mind to a computer.
Relational Analogy : Focuses on the relationship between pairs of words. For example, “Hand is to glove as foot is to sock.” The relationship is about things that cover.
Personal Analogy : Requires imagining oneself as an object or a situation. It’s often used in problem-solving to look at things from a different perspective.
Predictive Analogy : Used to predict the outcome of some actions by comparing it to known outcomes in similar scenarios. For example, “If you overwater a plant, it dies; similarly, too much of anything, even a good thing, can be harmful.”
Analogical Argument : Used in persuasive writing and speech, where an analogy is used as an argument or as a part of an argument.
Negative Analogy : Focuses on comparing dissimilarities between two things. For example, “Arguing on the internet is unlike a sports competition; there are no clear winners.”
Medical Analogy : Common in medical fields, where symptoms or conditions of a patient are compared to typical cases to diagnose or treat.
Historical Analogy : Draws a comparison between historical events to explain or predict current events. For example, comparing modern political situations to historical ones.
Mathematical Analogy : Involves comparing mathematical relationships, often used in teaching complex mathematical concepts.

How to Write an Analogy

Identify the Core Idea or Concept : Begin by determining the main idea or concept you want to explain or enhance through the analogy.
Find a Relatable Comparison : Choose a familiar or easily understandable object, situation, or concept that shares similarities or relationships with your core idea.
Establish a Clear Relationship : Ensure that the relationship between the two entities in your analogy is clear and logical. The comparison should highlight the similarities or explain the concept effectively.
Use Simple and Effective Language : The effectiveness of an analogy often lies in its simplicity. Use language that is easy to understand and avoids complexity.
Be Consistent : Maintain consistency in the elements of your analogy. Mixing different metaphors or comparisons can lead to confusion.
Test Your Analogy : Before finalizing, test your analogy to see if it makes the concept clearer and is understandable to your intended audience.

When to Use Analogy

To Simplify Complex Ideas : Analogies are excellent for breaking down complex or abstract concepts into simpler, more relatable terms.
In Teaching and Education : They are used to explain new or difficult subjects by relating them to something familiar to the students.
To Persuade or Argue : In rhetoric and writing, analogies can make arguments more persuasive by drawing parallels that the audience can easily understand.
To Enhance Writing : Writers often use analogies to add depth, creativity, and imagery to their writing, making it more engaging and vivid.
In Problem-Solving : Analogies can help in seeing problems from a new perspective, leading to innovative solutions.

How Does Analogy Work

By Establishing Relationships : Analogies work by drawing a parallel between two disparate entities, emphasizing their similarities in relation to each other.
Through Familiarity and Understanding : They often use familiar concepts to explain unfamiliar ones, making new or complex information more digestible and easier to grasp.
Creating Mental Images : Good analogies create vivid mental images, which can be more effective in communication than abstract concepts.
Enhancing Memory and Retention : Because they often involve storytelling or imagery, analogies can be more memorable than straightforward explanations, aiding in better retention of the information.
Building on Prior Knowledge : Analogies leverage the audience’s existing knowledge or experience, providing a foundation for understanding new information.

Analogies, when used effectively, can be powerful tools for communication, learning, and creativity, bridging gaps in understanding by connecting the unknown to the

25 Examples of Analogies

1. life is like a race.

2. Finding a Good Man is Like Finding a Needle in a Haystack

3. Just as a Sword is the Weapon of a Warrior, a Pen is the Weapon of a Writer

4. That’s as Useful as Rearranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic.

5. How a Doctor Diagnoses Diseases are Like How a Detective Investigates Crimes

6. Explaining a Joke is Like Dissecting a Frog

7. Just as a Caterpillar Comes out of its Cocoon, So we Must Come out of our Comfort Zone

8. A Movie is a Roller Coaster Ride of Emotions.

9. You are as Annoying as Nails on a Chalkboard.

10. Life is Like a Box of Chocolates – You Never Know What You’re Gonna Get!

11. Reasoning Analogy

Size: 69 KB

12. Analogy as the Core of Cognition

Size: 108 KB

13. Analogy by Similarity Example

Size: 68 KB

14. Semantic Analogy Example

Size: 74 KB

15. Teaching by Analogy Example

Size: 105 KB

16. Animal Analogies Example

Size: 41 KB

17. The Principle of Analogy

Size: 84 KB

18. Analogy as Exploration

File Format

Size: 62 KB

19. Science Analogy Example

Size: 61 KB

20. Practice Analogy Questions

Size: 46 KB

21. The Reaction Against Analogy

Size: 71 KB

22. Transformational Analogy Example

Size: 64 KB

23. Curve Analogies Template

24. Analogy and Transfer

Size: 109 KB

25. Analogy in Thinking Example

Size: 23 KB

What is an Analogy?

A figurative analogy is used when you compare two completely different ideas or things and use its similarities to give an explanation of things that are hard to understand or are too sensitive. Analogies are often used in thesis , essay writing , report writing , and even in speeches .

Step 1: Identify the Two or More Things You Want to Compare

To start is to identify two or more words or phrases you may want to compare. This is the first step to writing your analogy. You must also be careful with the analogy you are going to be using, if your audiences are children, you can use analogy for kids . The important thing is to be able to explain the idea or the concept.

Step 2: Do Your Research on the Similarities

In order for you to explain and understand the similarities between the words or phrases that you are using for analogy, you must first do your research about it. Simply writing two words together to compare is not enough. It is also important for you to understand what these two words mean and how similar are they in order for them to be compared.

Step 3: Make the Analogies

Make or create the analogies once you have figured out the similarities of the words you have written. If you have not, go back to the second step and continue until you found them. The analogy must be in a simple sentence or a simple statement. Avoid using technical jargon that defeats the purpose of the analogy.

Step 4: Give the Explanation of the Chosen Analogies

The last step is to give out the explanation of the chosen analogies. The explanation will help give the reader the idea of what they are reading and can grasp the information from the analogies. Provided the fact that these chosen analogies details and examples to back it.

What is the difference with analogy, simile and metaphor?

More often than not, an analogy is sometimes mistaken with the other figures of speech examples , namely simile and metaphor , because these are used to seek relationships between concepts and things. The figurative language simile compares two objects that use comparison words such as ‘like’ and ‘as’ where the whole metaphor would compare two objects with the use of the said comparison words.

What are the elements of an analogy?

What you can expect in the elements of an analogy are as follows: the two or more concepts that need to be compared, the shared characteristics of these concepts, the differences of the concepts, the purpose, the clarification, and lastly the creativity.

What is the difference between analogy and idioms?

An analogy is a comparison of two or more things, topics or concepts that helps explain the topic. An idiom is a phrase that has a figurative language or meaning to it.

Analogy compares two completely different things and look for similarities between two things or concepts and it only focuses on that angle. The use and purpose of analogies may baffle any reader at first but once they would realize how analogies can help writers in making difficult and sensitive topics or things understandable, analogies might be used frequently.

AI Generator

Text prompt

Instructive
Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

There is Something Here for Everyone!

How To Write An Analogy Essay – A Simple Guide

An analogy essay is an essay written to compare two items that are not related. The author has the obligation of analyzing the topics in depth in order to come up with elements that can be found in both items. The analyzation of one item should be deep and in comparison to the other item. The main reason for writing analogy essays is to explain to the reader the deep details of a particular topic and the manner in which they relate to another subject. It is written in a design that comes up with detailed information that cannot be found in other types of essays that discuss the general topic. You can hire an online essay writer to assist you with any assignment.

When coming up with an analogy topic, one should first understand that its structure is made up of two subjects. One of the subjects is the explainer and can be termed as the second subject. As well, the other subject is the one being explained and is the first subject. The author should focus on topics that they have information about to ensure that the opponent does not challenge the resemblances that they have pointed out. Below are some examples of possible topics that can be used to analogy essays.

Politics is like a religion
Freedom is like a dream
Poverty is like slavery
Music is like life
Stealing is like prostitution

According to essayzoo.org the format of analogy essay includes the title, introduction, differences, resemblances and a conclusion. In the section of the title, the author has to write the topic of the essay. This topic has to be one item being compared to another one. The topic is like a smile whereby the item of focus should be the first focus, the verb “is” is capitalized while the preposition “like” is not capitalized.

In the introduction part, the writer introduces the issue at hand by giving its status with respect to court cases, headlines or even recent events. The introduction ends with the analogy statement which gives a short representation of the manner in which the main subject is related to the second subject.

Regarding the section of differences should not be very elaborate because it is not the main focus of the essay. Therefore, it should not go into many details, does not make up most of the essay, can be written in one paragraph and should not be so long as the resemblance section. Hence, the author should just mention the minor difference and give a brief description that can be an acknowledgment, a grant or concede.

In addition to the differences section, the author has to admit the differences because its help in showing that one has done a thorough research regarding the idea, admitted the other side, addressed its vulnerability and has nothing to hide regarding the topic. This makes sure that the opponent is not in a position to challenge the author because the writer has already pointed out the key issues and discussed them in depth.

The resemblance section is the key part of the essay and should, therefore, contain deep details regarding the topic as much as possible. The common elements between the two topics are the purposes of the essay. They are also more relevant as compared to the differences. When writing about the resemblances, the most important one among them should be written last. The format includes naming of the resemblance, explaining it, illustrating how it relates the subjects and giving its reiteration. In the illustration section, the main subject will always come first then followed by the second subject.

The conclusion of an analogy essay is written by mentioning the thesis statement and the resemblances. Just like any other paper, the conclusion is made to summarize what the essay was all about and should, therefore, focus on proofing the point that was intended to be brought forward to the reader. It should focus on how the second subject relates to the first one.

Once the essay is done, it is good to proofread it in order to eliminate any possible grammar mistakes and edit where necessary. The author should incorporate the use of transition words so that the points that they are pointing out can run smoothly from one point to the other. As a result, this makes it easy for the reader to understand the essay easily. As well, the repetition of words should be avoided as much as possible to prevent the essay from sounding too obvious to understand.

Analogy essays are one of the most technical essays to write because they require a lot of knowledge regarding the two subjects and the manner in which they relate to one another. Otherwise, without such information, it would be difficult to write the essay. As well, it is important to follow the format from the choice of the topic, to the arrangement of the paragraphs and the conclusion part.

Tips To Avoid Distractions During Writing An Essay

Discover the World of Z-Library E-books for Your Reading Pleasure

How to Support Your Child in Excelling During the Upcoming Semester

Our Guide On Changing Your Career

Navigating Geneva with Style: The Ins and Outs of Private Transfers

Maximizing Your Layover: How to Turn a Few Hours into an Adventure

From Frequent Flyer to Premier Benefits: Navigating the World of Airline Loyalty Programs

Embrace the Call of the Wild: Renting a Jeep for Ultimate Mobility

Metaphors and Analogies: How to Use Them in Your Academic Life

Certain Experiences in life can't be captured in simple words. Especially if you are a writer trying to connect with your audience, you will need special threads to evoke exact feelings.

There are many literary devices to spark the readers' imagination, and analogies and metaphors are one of that magical arsenal. They enrich your text and give it the exact depth it will need to increase your readers' heartbeat.

Taking a particular characteristic and associating it with the other not only enriches your text's linguistic quality but gives the reader a correct pathway to deeper layers of a writer's psyche.

In this article, we are going to take a good look at the difference between analogy and metaphor and how to use them in your academic writing, and you will find some of the most powerful examples for each. Learn more about this and other vital linguistic tools on our essay writer service website.

What are Metaphors: Understanding the Concept

Let's discuss the metaphors definition. Metaphors are a figure of speech that compares two unrelated concepts or ideas to create a deeper and more profound meaning. They are a powerful tool in academic writing to express abstract concepts using different analogies, which can improve the reader's understanding of complex topics. Metaphors enable writers to paint vivid pictures in the reader's mind by comparing something familiar with an abstract concept that is harder to grasp.

The following are some of the most famous metaphors and their meanings:

The world is your oyster - the world is full of opportunities just waiting for you to grab them
Time is money - time is a valuable commodity that must be spent wisely
A heart of stone - someone who is emotionally cold and unfeeling

Analogies Meaning: Mastering the Essence

Analogies, on the other hand, are a comparison of two concepts or ideas that have some similarity in their features. They are used to clarify complex ideas or to make a new concept more relatable by comparing it to something that is already familiar.

Analogies are often followed by an explanation of how the two concepts are similar, which helps the reader to understand and make connections between seemingly disparate ideas. For example, in academic writing, if you were explaining the function of a cell membrane, you might use an analogy, such as comparing it to a security gate that regulates what enters and exits a building.

Check out these famous analogies examples:

Knowledge is like a garden: if it is not cultivated, it cannot be harvested.
Teaching a child without education is like building a house without a foundation.
A good friend is like a four-leaf clover; hard to find and lucky to have.

Benefits of Metaphors and Analogies in Writing

Chances are you are wondering why we use analogies and metaphors in academic writing anyway?

The reason why metaphors are beneficial to writers, especially in the academic field, is that they offer an effective approach to clarifying intricate concepts and enriching comprehension by linking them to more familiar ideas. Through the use of relatable frames of reference, these figures of speech help authors communicate complicated notions in an appealing and comprehensible way.

Additionally, analogies and metaphors are a way of artistic expression. They bring creativity and imagination to your writing, making it engaging and memorable for your readers. Beautiful words connect with readers on a deeper emotional level, allowing them to better retain and appreciate the information being presented. Such linguistic devices allow readers to open doors for imagination and create visual images in their minds, creating a more individualized experience.

However, one must be mindful not to plagiarize famous analogies and always use original ideas or appropriately cite sources when necessary. Overall, metaphors and analogies add depth and beauty to write-ups, making them memorable for years to come.

Understanding the Difference Between Analogy and Metaphor

While metaphors and analogies serve the similar purpose of clarifying otherwise complex ideas, they are not quite the same. Follow the article and learn how they differ from each other.

One way to differentiate between analogies and metaphors is through the use of 'as' and 'like.' Analogies make an explicit comparison using these words, while metaphors imply a comparison without any overt indication.

There is an obvious difference between their structure. An analogy has two parts; the primary subject, which is unfamiliar, and a secondary subject which is familiar to the reader. For example, 'Life is like a box of chocolates.' The two subjects are compared, highlighting their similarities in order to explain an entire concept.

On the other hand, a metaphor describes an object or idea by referring to something else that is not literally applicable but shares some common features. For example, 'He drowned in a sea of grief.'

The structural difference also defines the difference in their usage. Analogies are often used in academic writing where hard concepts need to be aligned with an easier and more familiar concept. This assists the reader in comprehending complex ideas more effortlessly. Metaphors, on the other hand, are more often used in creative writing or literature. They bring depth and nuance to language, allowing for abstract ideas to be communicated in a more engaging and imaginative way.

Keep reading and discover examples of metaphors and analogies in both academic and creative writing. While you are at it, our expert writers are ready to provide custom essays and papers which incorporate these literary devices in a seamless and effective way.

Using Famous Analogies Can Raise Plagiarism Concerns!

To avoid the trouble, use our online plagiarism checker and be sure that your work is original before submitting it.

Analogies and Metaphors Examples

There were a few analogies and metaphors examples mentioned along the way, but let's explore a few more to truly understand their power. Below you will find the list of metaphors and analogies, and you will never mistake one for the other again.

Love is like a rose, beautiful but with thorns.
The human body is like a machine, with many intricate parts working together in harmony.
The structure of an atom is similar to a miniature solar system, with electrons orbiting around the nucleus.
A computer's motherboard is like a city's central system, coordinating and communicating all functions.
The brain is like a muscle that needs constant exercise to function at its best.
Studying for exams is like training for a marathon; it requires endurance and preparation.
Explaining a complex scientific concept is like explaining a foreign language to someone who doesn't speak it.
A successful team is like a well-oiled machine, with each member playing a crucial role.
Learning a new skill is like planting a seed; it requires nurturing and patience to see growth.
Navigating through life is like sailing a ship with unpredictable currents and changing winds.
Life is a journey with many twists and turns along the way
The world's a stage, and we are all mere players.
Her eyes were pools of sorrow, reflecting the pain she felt.
Time is a thief, stealing away moments we can never recapture.
Love is a flame, burning brightly but at risk of being extinguished.
His words were daggers piercing through my heart.
She had a heart of stone, unable to feel empathy or compassion.
The city was a jungle, teeming with life and activity.
Hope is a beacon, guiding us through the darkest of times.
His anger was a volcano, ready to erupt at any moment.

How to Use Metaphors and Analogies in Writing: Helpful Tips

If you want your readers to have a memorable and engaging experience, you should give them some level of autonomy within your own text. Metaphors and analogies are powerful tools to let your audience do their personal interpretation and logical conclusion while still guiding them in the right direction.

First, learn about your audience and their level of familiarity with the topic you're writing about. Incorporate metaphors and analogies with familiar references. Remember, literary devices should cleverly explain complex concepts. To achieve the goal, remain coherent with the theme of the paper. But be careful not to overuse metaphors or analogies, as too much of a good thing can make your writing feel overloaded.

Use figurative language to evoke visual imagery and breathe life into your paper. Multiple metaphors can turn your paper into a movie. Visualizing ideas will help readers better understand and retain the information.

In conclusion, anytime is a great time to extend your text's impact by adding a well-chosen metaphor or analogy. But perfection is on the border of good and bad, so keep in mind to remain coherent with the theme and not overuse any literary device.

Metaphors: Unveiling Their Cultural Significance

Metaphors are not limited to just academic writing but can also be found in various forms of culture, such as art, music, film, and television. Metaphors have been a popular element in creative expression for centuries and continue to play a significant role in modern-day culture. For instance, metaphors can help artists convey complex emotions through their music or paintings.

Metaphors are often like time capsules, reflecting the cultural and societal values of a particular era. They shelter the prevailing beliefs, ideals, and philosophies of their time - from the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to modern-day pop culture.

Metaphors often frame our perception of the world and can shape our understanding of our surroundings. Certain words can take on new meanings when used metaphorically in certain cultural contexts and can assimilate to the phenomenon it is often compared to.

Here you can find a list of literature and poems with metaphors:

William Shakespeare loved using metaphors, and here's one from his infamous Macbeth: 'It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.'
Victor Hugo offers a timeless metaphor in Les Misérables: 'She is a rose, delicate and beautiful, but with thorns to protect her.'
Robert Frost reminds us of his genius in the poem The Road Not Traveled: 'The road less traveled.'

Movies also contain a wide range of English metaphors:

A famous metaphor from Toy Story: 'There's a snake in my boot!'
A metaphor from the famous movie Silver Lining Playbook: 'Life is a game, and true love is a trophy.'
An all-encompassing and iconic metaphor from the movie Star Wars: 'Fear is the path to the dark side.'

Don't forget about famous songs with beautiful metaphors!

Bob Dylan's Blowin' in the Wind uses a powerful metaphor when he asks: 'How many roads must a man walk down?'
A metaphor from Johnny Cash's song Ring of Fire: 'Love is a burning thing, and it makes a fiery ring.'
Bonnie Tyler's famous lyrics from Total Eclipse of the Heart make a great metaphor: 'Love is a mystery, everyone must stand alone.'

Keep reading the article to find out how to write an essay with the effective use of metaphors in academic writing.

Exploring Types of Metaphors

There is a wide variety of metaphors used in academic writing, literature, music, and film. Different types of metaphors can be used to convey different meanings and create a specific impact or evoke a vivid image.

Some common types of metaphors include similes / simple metaphors, implicit metaphors, explicit metaphors, extended metaphors, mixed metaphors, and dead metaphors. Let's take a closer look at some of these types.

Simple metaphors or similes highlight the similarity between two things using 'like' or 'as.' For example, 'Her eyes were as bright as the stars.'

Implicit metaphors do not make a direct comparison. Instead, they imply the similarity between the two concepts. An example of an implicit metaphor is 'Her words cut deep,' where the similarity between words and a knife is implied. Good metaphors are often implicit since they require the reader to use their own understanding and imagination to understand the comparison being made.

Explicit metaphors are straightforward, making a clear comparison between two things. For instance, 'He is a shining star.'

An extended metaphor, on the other hand, stretches the comparison throughout an entire literary work or section of a text. This type of metaphor allows the writer to create a more complex and elaborate comparison, enhancing the reader's understanding of the subject.

Mixed metaphors combine two or more unrelated metaphors, often leading to confusion and lack of clarity. If you are not an expert on the subject, try to avoid using confusing literary devices.

Dead metaphors are another danger. These are metaphors that have been overused to the extent that they have lost their original impact, becoming clichés and not being able to evoke original visual images.

In academic writing, metaphors create a powerful impact on the reader, adding color and depth to everyday language. However, they need to be well-placed and intentional. Using an inappropriate or irrelevant metaphor may confuse readers and distract them from the main message. If you want to avoid trouble, pay for essay writing service that can help you use metaphors effectively in your academic writing.

Exploring Types of Analogies

Like metaphors, analogies are divided into several categories. Some of the common types include literal analogies, figurative analogies, descriptive analogies, causal analogies, and false/dubious analogies. In academic writing, analogies are useful for explaining complex ideas or phenomena in a way that is easy to understand.

Literal analogies are direct comparisons of two things with similar characteristics or features. For instance, 'The brain is like a computer.'

Figurative analogies, on the other hand, compare two unrelated things to highlight a particular characteristic. For example, 'The mind is a garden that needs to be tended.'

Descriptive analogies focus on the detailed similarities between two things, even if they are not immediately apparent. For example, 'The relationship between a supervisor and an employee is like that of a coach and a player, where the coach guides the player to perform at their best.'

Causal analogies are used to explain the relationship between a cause and an effect. For instance, 'The increase in global temperatures is like a fever caused by environmental pollution.'

Finally, false/dubious analogies are comparisons that suggest a similarity between two things that actually have little in common. For example, 'Getting a college degree is like winning the lottery.'

If you are trying to explain a foreign concept to an audience that may not be familiar with it, analogies can help create a bridge and make the concept more relatable. However, coming up with a perfect analogy takes a lot of time. If you are looking for ways on how to write an essay fast , explore our blog and learn even more.

If you want your academic papers to stand out and be engaging for the reader, using metaphors and analogies can be a powerful tool. Now that you know the difference between analogy and metaphor, you can use them wisely to create a bridge between complex ideas and your audience.

Explore our blog for more information on different writing techniques, and check out our essay writing service for more help on crafting the perfect papers.

Need to Be on Top of Your Academic Game?

We'll elevate your academic writing to the next level with papers tailored to your specific requirements!

Clerc Center | PK-12 & Outreach
KDES | PK-8th Grade School (D.C. Metro Area)
MSSD | 9th-12th Grade School (Nationwide)
Gallaudet University Regional Centers
Parent Advocacy App
K-12 ASL Content Standards
National Resources
Youth Programs
Academic Bowl
Battle Of The Books
National Literary Competition
Youth Debate Bowl
Bison Sports Camp
Discover College and Careers (DC²)
Financial Wizards
Immerse Into ASL
Alumni Relations
Alumni Association
Homecoming Weekend
Class Giving
Get Tickets / BisonPass
Sport Calendars
Cross Country
Swimming & Diving
Track & Field
Indoor Track & Field
Cheerleading
Winter Cheerleading
Human Resources
Plan a Visit
Request Info

Areas of Study
Accessible Human-Centered Computing
American Sign Language
Art and Media Design
Communication Studies
Data Science
Deaf Studies
Early Intervention Studies Graduate Programs
Educational Neuroscience
Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences
Information Technology
International Development
Interpretation and Translation
Linguistics
Mathematics
Philosophy and Religion
Physical Education & Recreation
Public Affairs
Public Health
Sexuality and Gender Studies
Social Work
Theatre and Dance
World Languages and Cultures
B.A. in American Sign Language
B.A. in Art and Media Design
B.A. in Biology
B.A. in Communication Studies
B.A. in Communication Studies for Online Degree Completion Program
B.A. in Deaf Studies
B.A. in Deaf Studies for Online Degree Completion Program
B.A. in Education with a Specialization in Early Childhood Education
B.A. in Education with a Specialization in Elementary Education
B.A. in English
B.A. in Government
B.A. in Government with a Specialization in Law
B.A. in History
B.A. in Interdisciplinary Spanish
B.A. in International Studies
B.A. in Interpretation
B.A. in Mathematics
B.A. in Philosophy
B.A. in Psychology
B.A. in Psychology for Online Degree Completion Program
B.A. in Social Work (BSW)
B.A. in Sociology
B.A. in Sociology with a concentration in Criminology
B.A. in Theatre Arts: Production/Performance
B.A. or B.S. in Education with a Specialization in Secondary Education: Science, English, Mathematics or Social Studies
B.S in Risk Management and Insurance
B.S. in Accounting
B.S. in Biology
B.S. in Business Administration
B.S. in Information Technology
B.S. in Mathematics
B.S. in Physical Education and Recreation
B.S. In Public Health
General Education
Honors Program
Peace Corps Prep program
Self-Directed Major
M.A. in Counseling: Clinical Mental Health Counseling
M.A. in Counseling: School Counseling
M.A. in Deaf Education
M.A. in Deaf Education Studies
M.A. in Deaf Studies: Cultural Studies
M.A. in Deaf Studies: Language and Human Rights
M.A. in Early Childhood Education and Deaf Education
M.A. in Early Intervention Studies
M.A. in Elementary Education and Deaf Education
M.A. in International Development
M.A. in Interpretation: Combined Interpreting Practice and Research
M.A. in Interpretation: Interpreting Research
M.A. in Linguistics
M.A. in Secondary Education and Deaf Education
M.A. in Sign Language Education
M.S. in Accessible Human-Centered Computing
M.S. in Speech-Language Pathology
Master of Social Work (MSW)
Au.D. in Audiology
Ed.D. in Transformational Leadership and Administration in Deaf Education
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology
Ph.D. in Critical Studies in the Education of Deaf Learners
Ph.D. in Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences
Ph.D. in Linguistics
Ph.D. in Translation and Interpreting Studies
Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience (PEN)
Individual Courses and Training
Certificates
Certificate in Sexuality and Gender Studies
Educating Deaf Students with Disabilities (online, post-bachelor’s)
American Sign Language and English Bilingual Early Childhood Deaf Education: Birth to 5 (online, post-bachelor’s)
Peer Mentor Training (low-residency/hybrid, post-bachelor’s)
Early Intervention Studies Graduate Certificate
Online Degree Programs
ODCP Minor in Communication Studies
ODCP Minor in Deaf Studies
ODCP Minor in Psychology
ODCP Minor in Writing
Online Degree Program General Education Curriculum
University Capstone Honors for Online Degree Completion Program

Quick Links

PK-12 & Outreach
NSO Schedule

Essay Topic Suggestions to Help You Get Started

202.448-7036

10 Topic Suggestions for Descriptive Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Narrative Essays

Return to Top

10 Topic Suggestions for Process Analysis Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Exemplification Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Comparison and Contrast Essays

Return to Top

10 Topic Suggestions for Analogy Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Classification Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Cause and Effect Essays

Return to Top ]

10 Topic Suggestions for Definition Essays

10 Topic Suggestions for Argument and Persuasion Essays

About (2012). Retrieved April 27, 2012, from http://grammar.about.com/od/tz/g/topicterm.htm
Free Writing (2012). Retrieved April 27, 2012, from http://www.writingvalley.com/category/essay-topics/

202-448-7036

At a Glance

Quick Facts
University Leadership
History & Traditions
Accreditation
Consumer Information
Our 10-Year Vision: The Gallaudet Promise
Annual Report of Achievements (ARA)
The Signing Ecosystem
Not Your Average University

Our Community

Library & Archives
Technology Support
Interpreting Requests
Ombuds Support
Health and Wellness Programs
Profile & Web Edits

Visit Gallaudet

Explore Our Campus
Virtual Tour
Maps & Directions
Shuttle Bus Schedule
Kellogg Conference Hotel
Welcome Center
National Deaf Life Museum
Apple Guide Maps

Engage Today

Work at Gallaudet / Clerc Center
Social Media Channels
University Wide Events
Sponsorship Requests
Data Requests
Media Inquiries
Gallaudet Today Magazine
Giving at Gallaudet
Financial Aid
Registrar’s Office
Residence Life & Housing
Safety & Security
Undergraduate Admissions
Graduate Admissions
University Communications
Clerc Center

Gallaudet University, chartered in 1864, is a private university for deaf and hard of hearing students.

Accessibility
Cookie Consent Notice
Privacy Policy
File a Report

800 Florida Avenue NE, Washington, D.C. 20002

Essay Guides
Essay Topics
450 Analysis Essay Topics & Prompt Ideas in 2023
Speech Topics
Basics of Essay Writing
Other Essays
Main Academic Essays
Research Paper Topics
Basics of Research Paper Writing
Miscellaneous
Chicago/ Turabian
Data & Statistics
Methodology
Admission Writing Tips
Admission Advice
Other Guides
Student Life
Studying Tips
Understanding Plagiarism
Academic Writing Tips
Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing

Research Paper Guides
Formatting Guides
Basics of Research Process
Admission Guides
Dissertation & Thesis Guides

450 Analysis Essay Topics & Prompt Ideas in 2023

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

Looking for the perfect analytical essay topics? You're in the right place! In fact, there are plenty of things to analyze , whether you're writing about literature, history, politics, or science. All you need is the right direction and a bit of creativity.

Fortunately, we’ve compiled a list of great analysis essay topics, titles and ideas to help you get started on your next analytical paper. And that's not all. We've also included some handy tips on picking a topic that suits you best. So grab a pen and paper and get ready to explore top analysis topics in 2023.

Once you know the topic, but unsure how to write your piece, contact our professionals and buy an essay at StudyCrumb .

What Are Analytical Essay Topics?

An analytical essay is a type of essay where the writer analyzes and evaluates an issue, event, concept, or a work of art. Analytical essay topics are intended to analyze, interpret, and dissect a particular subject.

Topics for analysis essays often focus on critical issues that require in-depth exploration and understanding. These subjects may include:

Piece of literature
Historical event
Scientific phenomenon
Economic challenge
Social issue, etc.

Now that you have a better understanding of the vitals, let's learn how to select good topics for analytical essays.

How to Choose an Analytical Essay Topic?

A good analytical essay topic is a guarantee of successful writing. Below we are going to share some helpful tricks on how to pick an excellent analytical essay title:

Define your objective Understand what you aim to achieve with your analysis paper. Are you trying to scrutinize a complex idea or explore an aggravating issue? Your goal will guide your topic selection.
Brainstorm possible ideas During the brainstorming process, you can not only come up with fantastic analysis ideas, but also form a thesis. Write down everything that comes to your mind, even if your thoughts seem awkward at first.
Pre-assess the topic Spend some time understanding the analysis topic. This preliminary analysis will help determine if it's suitable for your assignment.
Narrow the scope Ensure your analysis essay title is neither too broad to manage nor too narrow to explore in-depth. It should offer sufficient room for a meaningful analysis.
Check available resources Confirm that there are enough credible sources to support your analysis. Reliable information will strengthen your arguments.
Pick the best idea Review your list of potential topics to analyze and give a preference to the title that excites you most. After all, it will be you who turns it into a stunning paper.

Good Analytical Essay Topics

Are you looking for good analysis essay topics ideas that will make your paper stand out? Don’t miss out on the following analytical essay prompts. We've gathered captivating title examples meant to inspire critical thinking in students.

Plato's cave allegory: Interpretations.
Fast food culture and obesity rates.
Themes in Orwell's "1984."
Cryptography in cyber security.
Color symbolism in "The Great Gatsby."
Understanding schizophrenia through case studies.
Examination of bullying in high school.
Globalization's effects on local cultures.
Dark matter: A mystery in the universe.
Dynamics of interracial marriages.
Depression: A silent epidemic.
Urban sprawl and its consequences.
Examination of sleep disorders.
Evolution of graphic novels.
Quantum computing: Prospects and challenges.

Unique Topics for Analysis Essays

Are you in search of unique analytical essay ideas that add that extra spark to your paper? Look no further. The list below encompasses a range of intriguing analytical topics you are sure to appreciate:

Internet memes: A cultural phenomenon.
Dissecting "Brave New World" dystopia.
Analysis of human rights in dystopian literature.
GMOs: Boon or bane?
Exploring body language in negotiations.
Quantum mechanics for laypersons.
Human-Animal relationships in literature.
Digitization and the future of libraries.
Artificial satellites and space pollution.
Surveillance society: Privacy in the 21st century.
Symbolism in Tarantino's films.
Biofuels: An alternative energy source.
Postmodern architecture: Challenging conventions.
Linguistic diversity and cultural identity.
Emotional intelligence in leadership.

Interesting Analysis Paper Topics

To make your writing more exciting, pick a creative title from the list of analytical paper topics below. By choosing a prompt from this selection, you're sure to make an interesting point in your upcoming analytical essay.

Mental imagery in sports performance.
Exploring introversion through Carl Jung's theory.
Cryptocurrencies: A new era in finance.
Satire in Mark Twain's writings.
Ethical dilemmas in genetic engineering.
Game theory in economics.
Characters' evolution in "Pride and Prejudice."
Postmodernism in contemporary art.
Space tourism: Prospects and challenges.
Mindfulness in cognitive therapy.
Development of jazz in the 20th century.
Hidden messages in Disney movies.
Psychological aspects of cult behavior.
Pioneering women in computer science.
Conspiracy theories: A sociological perspective.

Easy Analytical Essay Topics

Don’t want to get too complicated? That's all right. We've got some simpler topics for analytical essay that you can tackle without much effort. Let’s explore these analysis essay ideas together:

Power dynamics in "Animal Farm."
Climate change awareness campaigns.
Fad diets and their popularity.
Stereotypes in modern sitcoms.
Mobile apps and user behavior.
Popular themes in country music.
Comic books as modern mythology.
Marketing tactics in the fast food industry.
Appeal of superhero movies.
Emotional appeal in advertising.
Use of color in interior design.
Motifs in "Harry Potter" series.
Impact of reality TV on participants.
Popularity of online shopping.
Coffee culture around the world.

Advanced Analysis Essay Topics

For those craving a more challenging analysis, we present a collection of advanced analytical essay title examples. These prompts touch on complex themes, concepts, or theories, demanding a higher level of analytical thinking and critical insight. From exploring abstract philosophical ideas to deciphering intricate scientific theories, these analytical topics are perfect for a seasoned writer.

Existentialism in Samuel Beckett's "Waiting for Godot."
Quantum physics and the nature of reality.
Influence of ancient Greek philosophy on Western thought.
Deconstructing post-truth politics.
Social implications of neuroscience advancements.
Deep learning in artificial intelligence.
String theory : A critique.
Ethical implications of human cloning.
Exploring moral relativism.
Psychoanalysis and dream interpretation.
Understanding Wittgenstein's "Language games."
Transhumanism and its implications.
Intersectionality in feminist theory.
Evolutionary biology and the origin of altruism .
Analyzing determinism versus free will.

Best Analytical Essay Topic Ideas

Take a look at these options below or head straight away to Title Generator for Essay which will offer a whole list of topics for you:

Sustainable cities: An analysis of urban planning.
Deconstructing minimalism in design.
Human rights in the era of globalization.
Breaking down Salinger’s "The Catcher in the Rye" alienation.
DNA editing: Ethical dilemma.
Space exploration : A necessity or luxury?
Modern parenting styles and their outcomes.
Gender bias in STEM fields.
Revisiting the ethics of war in the 21st century.
The psychology behind conspiracy theories.
Meditation: A path to mental well-being?
The relevance of classical music today.
Identity formation in the digital age.
Food security and future challenges.
Unpacking the effects of poverty on education.

Analytical Essay Ideas & Writing Prompts for Students

Are you seeking analytical essay topics that match your academic level? You're in luck! Our assortment of analysis paper ideas caters to students at all stages. From high school to postgraduate studies, we've gathered a rich collection of essay titles across numerous fields. These analysis essay prompts are designed to help you channel your passion into an A+ analysis.

Analytical Essay Topics for High School

High school is the perfect time to hone your analytical skills, and what better way to do it than writing about analysis topic ideas? Below, we present some good analytical essay topics suitable for high school level:

Profiling a hero in a literary classic.
Online learning: A blessing or a curse?
Interpreting symbolism in "Lord of the Flies".
Smartphone addiction among teenagers.
Decoding the success of reality TV.
The evolution of fashion trends.
The concept of happiness in Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics."
The influence of advertising on consumer behavior.
Peer pressure and its role in decision making.
Understanding the dystopia in "Hunger Games".
Pop music's contribution to youth culture.
The importance of sports in school curriculum.
Racial representation in modern television.
Climate change activism among youth.
Social media as a tool for self-expression.

Analytical Essay Topics for College

As you advance in your studies, so should the complexity of your analysis essay titles. Here are some analytical essay topics for college students to explore:

Ethical implications of AI advancements.
Unraveling the myth of the American Dream in modern literature.
Exploring mental health stigma in college students.
Dissecting the causes and effects of the financial crisis.
Intersectionality in contemporary feminist movements.
Deconstructing the appeal of celebrity culture.
Space exploration: Is it worth the cost?
A deep dive into quantum computing.
Decoding the success of e-commerce platforms.
Unpacking the concept of toxic masculinity.
Analyzing global warming solutions: Are they enough?
Privacy versus security in the digital era.
Unraveling the intricacies of the Middle East conflict.
Evaluating the role of international organizations in global conflicts.
The evolution of artificial intelligence and its future.

Analytical Essay Topics & Title Examples by Subject

Regardless of your area of study, analytical essays demand a thorough understanding of the subject matter. From literature to technology, we have topics for an analytical essay in every field. Scroll down and you will find interesting analysis paper title examples for various disciplines.

Political Analytical Topics for Essays

There are numerous things to analyze in politics. You can analyze political movements, policies or even current events. Here are some great political topics for an analytical paper:

Populism in the 21st century: Causes and implications.
Analyzing voter behavior in the last general elections.
Implications of US-China trade relations.
US immigration policies since 9/11.
The efficacy of international sanctions.
Political corruption: Tackling a global issue.
The rise of political dynasties.
Feminism in political theory and practice.
The role of the United Nations in contemporary politics.
Political ideologies and their impact on policy making.
The rise and fall of totalitarianism in modern practices.
Privacy rights in the age of surveillance.
Environmental politics and its future trajectory.
The role of political cartoons in societal commentary.
The ethics of political lobbying.

Social Issue Analysis Topics

Social issues are great analytical topics as they affect large groups of people. From poverty to mental health, there is no shortage of social issues to analyze. Take as example these issue analysis topics:

Digital divide: A growing concern.
The changing dynamics of the modern family.
Racism and its deep-rooted implications.
The social impact of the gender pay gap.
Child labor: Causes and consequences.
Human trafficking: A hidden reality.
The rise of cyberbullying in the digital era.
The social implications of an aging population.
Gun control laws and their effectiveness.
The influence of celebrity culture on youth.
Social ramifications of climate change.
Understanding the complexity of racism in America.
Deconstructing the effects of sexism on society.
Psychological impacts of homelessness.
Causes and consequences of domestic violence.

History Analysis Topics for Essays

Analyzing history is the way to truly understand events, people and ideas of the past. Below are some interesting history topics for analysis essays:

Factors leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Causes and consequences of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
The Renaissance influence on modern art.
Cold War rivalry.
American Civil Rights Movement.
Ancient Greek philosophy and Western thought.
Causes and implications of the French Revolution.
Timeline of women's suffrage movement.
Reasons behind the fall of the Roman Empire.
A thorough examination of the Holocaust.
Martin Luther King Jr. and impact on the civil rights movement.
Consequences of the Industrial Revolution on social structure.
Analyzing the Arab Spring: Causes and effects.
Native American tribes and the American Revolution.
The rise and fall of the British Empire.

Cultural Titles for Analysis Essays

Now it's the culture analysis essay topics turn. Cultural studies allow students to analyze sensitive issues and explore different customs. We can talk about the influence of religious views on a particular society or about some specific cultural characteristics. Below, our experts have selected more narrow analysis title examples regarding culture:

Rites of passage in Maasai tribes.
Samoan tattoo tradition: Symbolism and meaning.
The allure of French gastronomy.
Bollywood: Impact on Indian society and beyond.
Cultural significance of the Chinese Zodiac.
An analytical study of Irish folklore.
Indian Classical Dance forms: A cultural perspective.
Flamenco: An analysis of Spain's cultural icon.
Aesthetics in traditional Japanese tea ceremonies.
Cultural importance of Anzac Day in Australia.
Italian Renaissance: Evolution.
The cultural impact of Reggae music in Jamaica.
Understanding Brazilian Carnaval through samba music.
Aboriginal dreamtime paintings.
Fashion trends and their cultural implications.

Art Analytical Essay Topics

Whether it’s a painting, sculpture or architecture, analysis essays require a thorough understanding of the historical context and social significance. Explore these analytical essay topics related to art:

The influence of Cubism in modern art forms.
Hidden meanings in Frida Kahlo's self-portraits.
Art Nouveau's influence on modern design.
Pop Art: A critique of consumerism.
The revolutionary essence of Dadaism.
Expressionism: A mirror of societal angst.
Interpreting symbolism in Bosch's 'Garden of Earthly Delights'.
Botticelli's 'Birth of Venus' : A new perspective.
The artistic impact of the Harlem Renaissance.
Surrealism's quest for the subconscious.
The role of light in Impressionism.
Gothic architecture: A study of Notre Dame.
Analyzing chiaroscuro in Caravaggio's works .
The legacy of African tribal art.
Kandinsky's 'Composition VII': Navigating through abstract expressionism.

Education Analysis Essay Ideas

Education is a broad field with interesting subtopics. Your analysis in this field can talk about the changing educational landscape in the US or elsewhere. Here are some analysis paper topics in education :

Standardized testing: Merits and demerits.
Bilingual education: An investigation.
Role of technology in special education.
Homeschooling: A comparative study.
Critical thinking skills: Importance in curriculum.
Academic pressure: Impact on students' mental health.
Corporal punishment in schools: A global perspective.
Montessori Method: A revolution in early education.
Inclusivity in the classroom: Strategies and outcomes.
Student-led learning: Benefits and challenges.
The evolution of sex education.
College tuition fees: A critical evaluation.
Effectiveness of e-learning during the pandemic.
The role of arts in cognitive development.
Skill-based education versus traditional education systems.

Health Analytical Paper Topics

When it comes to healthcare and medicine, the stakes are high. You can analyze various aspects of healthcare such as public health, medical protocols and patient care. Hover over the following analytical essay topics in the field of medicine:

Nutritional misinformation: A public health crisis.
Telemedicine: A game-changer in healthcare.
Obesity: Lifestyle factor or genetic predisposition?
Mandatory vaccinations: Pros and cons.
The rise of health tracking technologies.
Cannabis legalization: Medical benefits and risks.
Mental health impact of social media.
Palliative care: Importance and challenges.
COVID-19 and mental health.
Eating disorders among teenagers.
The opioid crisis: Causes and solutions.
Holistic medicine: Effectiveness and popular misconceptions.
Understanding the end-of-life decisions.
Genetically modified vaccines: Pros and cons.
Healthcare reform in the US.

Environment Analytical Essay Topics

Our environment is an important part of our lives. Analyzing environmental science topics using an analytical approach can help us better understand our planet. Choose a title for analysis essay from these suggestions about the environment:

Green architecture: A solution for sustainable living.
Soil erosion: Unveiling its hidden impacts.
Coral reefs: Underwater ecosystems at risk.
Acid rain: Effects on ecosystems.
Noise pollution: An underestimated environmental hazard.
Melting glaciers: Unfolding consequences.
Invasive species: Ecological balance disruptors.
Waste management in urban settings.
Renewable energy: Potential and limitations.
Ecological footprint: Measuring human impact.
Light pollution: Implications for nocturnal wildlife.
Urban heat islands: An urban environmental issue.
The influence of consumerism on resource depletion.
Ocean acidification: The lesser-known side of CO2 emissions.

Social Media Analytical Essay Topics

Social media has a pervasive presence in our lives. But how does it shape us and what potential risks does it carry? You can explore these questions using analytical essay topics:

"Likes" culture: Validation or addiction?
Hashtag activism : Online revolution or slacktivism?
TikTok: Reshaping content consumption.
LinkedIn: Professional networking in the digital age.
Privacy concerns in the era of social media.
Snapchat: Reinventing ephemeral communication.
Instagram's effect on entrepreneurship.
Political campaigning on social media platforms.
Social media and its role in body positivity movement.
Twitter: A platform for social justice or cancel culture?
The role of social media in education.
Influence of violent media content on school children.
Media bias in presidential elections/ healthcare/ food advertising.
Use of persuading strategies in advertising.
Effect of embedded marketing used in the movies.

>> More ideas: Social Media Research Topics

Science Analytical Essay Topics

Science has brought about immense changes to our lives. You can analyze the impact of scientific development through analysis essay topics ideas offered below:

Ethical dimensions of cloning technology.
Pseudoscience : Distinguishing facts from myths.
Is genetic engineering controlling evolution?
Mars colonization: Sci-fi dream or future reality?
Nanotechnology: Small size, big impact.
Role of artificial intelligence in scientific discovery.
Biological warfare: Unseen threats.
Rewriting the genetic code with CRISPR technology.
Autonomous vehicles.
Dark matter and dark energy.
Plastic production: Harm or need?
Computers that can tell your age just by looking at your face.
Can venom from spiders and other animals be used safely in treatment?
Do greenhouse gasses harm people?
How are scientists using genetic information to conserve species?

>> Learn more: Science Research Topics

Technology Topics for an Analytical Essay

Technology shapes our world and its progress sparks many interesting areas for analysis. Here are some examples of analytical essay topics on technology:

Precision agriculture and digital age farming.
Telemedicine: Reimagining healthcare delivery.
Disruptive technology: Impact on traditional industries.
Green tech solutions contributing to sustainable living.
Fintech innovations in reshaping financial services.
Geoengineering as a viable solution for climate change.
Nanotechnology in medicine.
Biometrics and identity verification in the digital world.
Space tourism as a potential leisure activity of the future.
How renewable energy tech is powering a sustainable future.
Augmented reality and education.
Genomic sequencing: Foundation of personalized medicine.
Smart textiles: Fashion meets functionality.
EdTech role in modern education.
Using technology in archaeology.

>> View more: Technology Research Paper Topics

Analysis Essay Topics by Types

Analytical essay topics can be classified based on the type of analysis they involve. The most popular categories are shown right below:

Each of these analytical essay topics has its unique approach and demands different skills from the writer. Let’s explore potential title ideas for each type together!

Literature Analysis Essay Topics

When it comes to writing a literary analysis , there are many things to explore. You might investigate entire works or focus on a few elements such as characters, themes, and symbolism. With this in mind, we’ve prepared another list of analysis essay topics suitable for literature.

Examining heroism in J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings."
Symbolism in F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby."
Feminist critique of Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter."
Magic realism in Gabriel Garcia Marquez's "One Hundred Years of Solitude."
Narrative structure in Emily Bronte's "Wuthering Heights."
Post-colonial themes in Chinua Achebe's "Things Fall Apart."
Dystopian society in George Orwell's "1984."
Satire and humor in Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn."
Examination of loss and despair in Sylvia Plath's "The Bell Jar."
Exploration of moral ambiguity in Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness."
The role of nature in Henry David Thoreau's "Walden."
Representation of race in Toni Morrison's "Beloved."
Exploring time and memory in Marcel Proust's "In Search of Lost Time."
Absurdity in Albert Camus' "The Stranger."
Power dynamics in William Golding's "Lord of the Flies."

Rhetorical Analysis Essay Topics

Rhetorical analysis takes a close look at how texts are written, and what methods are used to persuade readers. Below, you’ll find some analysis essay topics focused on rhetorics:

Analysis of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech.
Rhetorical strategies in Barack Obama's inaugural address.
The effectiveness of Winston Churchill's "We Shall Fight on the Beaches" speech.
Persuasion techniques in Apple's product advertisements.
Examination of rhetoric in J.K. Rowling's Harvard commencement speech.
Evaluation of ethos, pathos, and logos in Nike's "Just Do It" campaign.
Analysis of rhetorical strategies in "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee.
The use of rhetorical devices in Queen Elizabeth's "Tilbury Speech."
The effectiveness of persuasion in "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King Jr.
Examination of the rhetorical appeals in JFK's inaugural address .
Rhetoric in anti-smoking public service announcements.
Analysis of rhetoric in the "Me Too" movement's online discourse.
The use of pathos in Emily Dickinson's poetry.
Examination of rhetorical devices in TED Talks.
Rhetorical strategies in "The Gettysburg Address" by Abraham Lincoln.

>> View more: Rhetorical Analysis Essay Topics

Critical Analysis Essay Topics

Critical analysis essay is a form of structured writing that evaluates a work, topic, or concept. Here are some analysis essay topics to consider if you want to explore something critically:

The shift in global power dynamics.
Evaluation of the feminist theory in modern society.
Shakespeare's portrayal of power in "Macbeth."
Climate change policies of various countries.
Mindfulness techniques in managing stress.
The role of symbolism in "The Great Gatsby."
Education system's response to the pandemic.
Human rights situation in North Korea.
Critical analysis of the 'Black Lives Matter' movement.
The effectiveness of renewable energy policies.
A critical look at representation in Disney movies.
Mental health portrayal in media.
Privacy issues in the digital age.
Influence of pop art on contemporary culture.
Ethical implications of genetic engineering.

Causal Analysis Essay Topics

Speaking about causal analysis, there is also a lot of potential for analytical essay topics. Such prompts are intended to explore various causes and effects related to different topics. Consider these ideas:

Consequences of childhood obesity on adult health.
Impacts of globalization on developing economies.
Effects of social media on interpersonal relationships.
Causes and impacts of desertification.
Consequences of remote learning on students' mental health.
Impact of bilingual upbringing on cognitive development.
Causes and effects of high unemployment rates.
Influence of divorce on children's social development.
Effects of air pollution on urban life quality.
Causes of increasing mental health issues among millennials.
Impact of climate change on biodiversity.
Causes and effects of cyberbullying.
Consequences of fast food on public health.
Outcomes of inadequate sleep on cognitive functions.
Effects of overpopulation on global resources.

Analysis by Division Essay Topics

Analysis by division is an academic essay that requires students to divide a large topic into more manageable parts. Here are some interesting analytical easy ideas for this type of paper:

Elements of a successful marketing campaign.
Exploring the components of a sustainable city.
Breaking down the layers of effective communication.
Components of a balanced diet and their health benefits.
The anatomy of a bestselling novel.
Different methods of waste management.
The components of a productive team.
Breaking down the ingredients of a viral social media post.
Exploring the elements of a successful online business.
Components of an effective educational system.
Dissecting the different types of renewable energy.
Elements that define a thriving economy.
Types of renewable energy sources and their potential impacts.
Breaking down the structure of a successful relationship.
Examining the components of human emotions.

Visual Analysis Essay Topics

A picture is indeed worth a thousand words. The art of visually analyzing an image—whether it's a photograph, a painting, or even a billboard advertisement—requires a keen eye and a mind for detail. Take a look at these analytical essay topics for visual analysis:

Color symbolism in Van Gogh's "Starry Night."
Visual rhetoric in World War II propaganda posters.
The use of light and shadow in Caravaggio’s paintings.
Meaning behind abstract shapes in Kandinsky's "Composition VII."
Cultural representation in National Geographic covers.
Body language in presidential debates.
Visual semiotics in modern fashion advertising.
The portrayal of gender in Disney animations.
Examination of horror movie poster designs.
Architectural space in Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater.
Symmetry in Islamic art.
Use of color to convey mood in Pixar’s "Inside Out."
Emotional expression in Edvard Munch’s "The Scream."
How camera angles shape narrative in "The Godfather."
The symbolism in Banksy's street art.

Textual Analysis Essay Topics

Get to interpret the text, language, and meanings with these textual analysis topics. They invite you to examine various types of texts – from books to speeches and social media posts.

Character development in Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice."
Love and relationships in Gabriel García Márquez's "Love in the Time of Cholera."
Language symbolism in Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland."
Irony in O. Henry's short stories.
Textual analysis of Shakespeare's sonnets.
Understanding conflict in Chinua Achebe's "Things Fall Apart."
Role of narrative voice in Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre."
Imagery in the poems of William Blake.
Use of suspense in Edgar Allan Poe's short stories.
Political rhetoric in inaugural speeches.
Examination of metaphor in Langston Hughes' poetry.
Imagery in Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken."
Character analysis in Charles Dickens' "Great Expectations."
Examination of persuasive language in advertising campaigns.
Persuasive strategies in Apple's product descriptions.

Extra Analytical Essay Topics & Writing Prompts

Discover an additional set of analytical essay topics and prompts in this section. From curious intricacies to broad concepts, these topics provide an extra dose of inspiration for students looking to take their analytical skills to the next level.

Analytical Report Topics

Are you looking for an analytical report topic? Don’t skip these ideas. Below, we’ve added extra topics for analytical reports that you might find interesting:

Transforming traditional businesses with digital marketing.
Declining biodiversity: Causes and solutions.
Alternative energy: A feasible substitute for fossil fuels?
Food waste: A global crisis.
Climate change policies in developed vs. developing countries.
The future of e-commerce post-Covid-19.
Cybersecurity: New strategies for an ever-evolving threat.
Space tourism: An in-depth look.
Zero-waste initiatives in urban cities.
The growth and impact of telemedicine.
Decoding the rise of cryptocurrency.
Analyzing the shift from physical to online classrooms.
Mental health effects of long-term remote work.
Biotech advancements and their implications on human health.
Smart homes: Pros, cons, and future developments.

Analytical Research Topics

The good news is that analytical research paper topics are incredibly diverse. You can write about almost anything. But many students still have a hard time narrowing down their choice. That’s why, we also enhanced our list with extra analytical research topics:

Examining mindfulness practices in reducing anxiety.
Understanding urban farming as a sustainable solution.
Analysis of cryptocurrency's impact on traditional banking.
How does remote work influence work-life balance?
Evaluation of mental health programs in schools.
Gene editing and ethical considerations.
Precision medicine: A revolution in healthcare.
Dissecting the digital divide in education.
Plastic pollution in oceans: An in-depth analysis.
Implications of autonomous vehicles on traffic management.
Exploring nanotechnology applications in environmental conservation.
The correlation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement.
Impact of peer pressure on adolescent behavior.
Nutritional genomics and personalized diets.
The potential effects of prolonged space travel on human physiology.

Bottom Line on Analytical Essay Topics

We hope these analytical easy topics and title ideas have made your selection process simpler. But don't worry if you're still unsure or battling against the clock – our team of experts is ready to assist. We can offer personalized topic suggestions and efficient writing help. From brainstorming to final drafts, we can handle your academic tasks swiftly and professionally.

Connect with our team of academic professionals and let's get started on crafting your masterpiece! Say ‘ write my essay online ’ and have your task handled by an expert.

Daniel Howard is an Essay Writing guru. He helps students create essays that will strike a chord with the readers.

Essays on Analogy

160 samples on this topic

The array of written assignments you might receive while studying Analogy is stunning. If some are too challenging, an expertly crafted sample Analogy piece on a related topic might lead you out of a deadlock. This is when you will definitely acknowledge WowEssays.com ever-widening directory of Analogy essay samples meant to catalyze your writing enthusiasm.

Our directory of free college paper samples showcases the most vivid instances of excellent writing on Analogy and related topics. Not only can they help you develop an interesting and fresh topic, but also display the effective use of the best Analogy writing practices and content organization techniques. Also, keep in mind that you can use them as a source of authoritative sources and factual or statistical data processed by real masters of their craft with solid academic experience in the Analogy area.

Alternatively, you can take advantage of efficient write my essay assistance, when our writers deliver a unique model essay on Analogy tailored to your individual specifications!

The Doctrine Of Doing And Allowing Essay

Introduction

Friedman’s Position On Social Responsibility {type) To Use As A Writing Model

Outliers: chapter summaries and reflections book review examples, pros and cons of negotiation as a method of conflict resolution: free sample essay to follow, example of essay on team presentation evaluation journal entry.

Presentation Evaluation

Our team gave a group presentation regarding the comparison of Amazon and Alibaba. After considering my performance as it relates to the grading criteria, I would say that my strongest area was my design or my message, and my weakest area was my presentation style. This is because my research was complete, and my message was clear, but our delivery had certain flaws which could be addressed. I think, in terms of the team as a whole, I would say our presentation style was strongest, or our message, but our design was weakest.

Presentation Message generally complete, but citation was lacking

Moses And Monotheism Part III Literature Review Example

Mass incarceration: the new jim crow analogy essay samples, argumentative strategies and internet reliability essay samples, good hymn for the weekend by beyonce argumentative essay example, perfect model essay on analytical perspective/ elizabeth cady stanton’s, “keynote address at the first women’s rights convention”.

Brief Summary

Perfect Model Essay On Changing Behavior In Relation To Mode Of Transportation Choice In Kuwait

Research Method Assignment B

Chimamanda Adichie, Half Of A Yellow Sun Essay Example

Sample essay on rene descartes: meditations on first philosophy, workplace bullying by tracy, lutgen-sandvik & alberts, j. k essays examples, good example of essay on secrets are lies, privacy is theft: the circle and transparency, free should intelligent design be included in public school science classes argumentative essay example, learn to craft research papers on hiv prevention and focus on behavioral approaches with this example, nancy reagan: free sample critical thinking to follow, the cyborg manifesto: article review you might want to emulate, the hard problem of consciousness: between science and philosophy essay example.

INTRODUCTION

The Culture Of Shut Up Essays Example

Learner's Full Name

Free Rachels And Callahan On Euthanasia Essay Example

Expertly written essay on ecological struggle in the american society to follow.

Ecological Struggle in the American Society

Free Critical Thinking On Assessing Socrates And “Government”

Good example of essay on gerard hopkins and romanticism, free essay about study guide.

Current Status and Future Directions of School Based Interventions

Example Of Fully Functioning Human Beings Vs Winesburg Ohio Essay

Does the materialist position imply a determinist position on the possibility of free will explain. essay.

Philosophy Questions

Compare and contrast the views of John Searle and Rene Descartes on dualism.

Good Essay About Argument Analysis: A College Education

Factors affecting second language learning research papers examples, example of fallacy example essay.

Fallacies in Communication

English versus Me Essays Examples

Mental health issues in correction system article sample.

The prison system that currently exists today offers a retribution measure instead of corrective actions to assert and ensure that the convicted assailants, after serving their prison time, could go back to the community as responsible individuals. While this is the case, a documentary featured in 2005 and 2009 documents a different role of prisons. Aside from housing convicted individuals, it also serves as a modern day asylum for mentally-ill individuals convicted of committing a crime against society.

International and Global Operations in Heineken Inc Dissertation Sample

What is the impact of effective formulation and implementation of strategies for venturing in international and global operations in Heineken Inc?

The Morality of Abortion Essay Samples

A. Thomson presents the case of the sick violinist in his defense of abortion. The proposition identifies that an individual wakes up in the morning and is next to an unconscious violinist (Thomson 114). Assuming that a plugged connection that saves their life is the only way that the violinist will live, the question arises whether there is a moral obligation to the individual to sustain lie for the violinist despite the personal atrophy that is simultaneously caused (Thomson 114).

Remarks on Mediation and Production by Soren Andreasen and Lars Bang Larsen Critical Thinkings Example

In the article entitled, “Remarks on Mediation and Production,” the authors Soren Andreasen and Lars Bang Larsen make their remark on the currently perceived role and suggested future role of middlemen. Note that these two authors are seasoned artists, writers, critics, and curators. Being middlemen, themselves, the two authors aim to defend the idea that middlemen play a more significant role in shaping the style of production – that middlemen help bring modernity and creativity in the style of production.

Example Of Course Work On Gender Roles In The Taming Of The Shrew

Nannie jeter course work example.

- What was the first name of the documentarian’s African-American caregiver?

- Since 1971 how much was the War on Drugs reported to cost? You will see this answer written so you don’t have to listen for it.

Over $1 Trillion Dollars

Example Of Macroeconomics Course Work

DQ 1. The Circular Flow in Economics

The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade Book Review Sample

Thomas is married to Vanessa Jebb who comes from a diplomatic family. Jebb’s father was the first acting Secretary General of the United Nations. Thomas Hugh was a professor of History at University of Readings from 1966-1975. In 1979-1991, Thomas High was the Director of the Center for Policy Studies in London. Thomas Hugh was an ally of Margaret Thatcher during Thatcher’s reign. In his argument, Thomas Hugh presents an argument that is usually pro-European and conservative.

Course Work On Empiricism As The Foundation For Knowledge

Philosophy questions

- With reference to Locke's theory regarding ideas as well to the idea of primary and secondary qualities, breakdown and explain in Locke’s own terms what exactly you are perceiving when you perceive an object that you would identify as “a yellow banana”. In other words, what exactly are the primary qualities of this object, and what are its secondary qualities?

The Location Of The Solar System In Our Galaxy Course Work Sample

Short summary of shari'a’s evolution research papers examples.

Islam’s Shari'a Law

Unintentional Power In The Design Of Computer Systems Course Work Examples

Free an affirmative statement about birthday gifts thesis sample, cognitive psychology essay, the mind of the maker course work examples, essay on critical analysis report form for opposing opinion articles.

1. Author and major thesis of the Yes side. The authors of the Yes side are Marion Nestle and Michael F. Jacobson. They argue that a public health approach is needed to encourage Americans to eat a healthy diet.

Good Critical Thinking About Analogical Reasoning And Concept Formation

Essay on a critical thinking handbook, wendell berry’s- the art of a common place thesis statements examples, good example of argumentative essay on american legal system, argumentative essay on all animals are equal.

Evaluate an Argument and Create a Counter Argument

Good Essay About Annotation

Summary and Annotation

Essay On A Comparison Between Apples And Oranges Is Occurs When We Compare Two Items, Which

Statistical inference

Good Essay About Harlem Renaissance

Fifth agreement essays examples.

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Analytical Essay Guide

Analytical Essay Topics

Interesting Analytical Essay Topics Ideas for Students

15 min read

Defining an Analytical Essay

An analytical essay is a type of academic writing that examines a subject, breaks it down into its constituent parts, and evaluates it.

It can take two main forms:

Literary analysis , where you dissect a piece of literature
Critical analysis , where you assess a topic, idea, or argument.

Analytical Essay Topics for Students

An analytical essay can be written for any field or subject. If you are looking for analytical essay topic ideas, the list provided below will be beneficial.

Analytical Essay Topics for High School

Why do people have fears and phobias?
How to get rid of drug addiction?
Is love a chemical reaction?
Why do people have pet peeves?
How are deep water inhabitants different from other inhabitants?
Why are insects attracted to light?
Why are all animals scared of people?
Why is respecting nature essential?
Why do emotional support animals make older people happy?
Why is pessimism worse than optimism?

Analytical Essay Topics for College Students

Why are aliens still not found?
Why is the Armageddon concept so abstract?
Why is ecology getting worse?
How can animal testing be avoided?
How are microbes harmful to human beings?
Why are people allergic to particular things?
How do undue restrictions make teenagers rebellious?
Why do people appear to be bi-sexual?
What makes a person an extrovert?
What problems do alcoholics have?

Literary Analytical Essay Topics

Symbolism in “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”
The use of metaphor in The Picture of Dorian Gray
The use of symbolism and imagery in “Ah Sunflower” by William Blake
Enigma and music in The Raven by Poe
Metaphors in Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf
Allusions in Eliot’s “The Hollow Man”
Multiculturalism in Solomon by Toni Morrison
The vampires of the 19th century and 20th century.
Timeframes in “Memento Mori” by Jonathan Nolan
Features of tragicomedy in metamodernist writings

Critical Analytical Essay Topics

Examine a popular TV show.
Analyze a movie based on a novel
Analyze a poem that has a first-person point of view.
Analyze the literary context of Things Fall Apart
Critical analysis of Ophelia’s death in Hamlet
Irony used by Mark Twain in his short stories
Single parent Vs. dual-parent families
Analyze how American Culture is getting influenced by Latino
Critically analyze the change in gender roles.
Talk about choosing models who are outside of a healthy body.

Social Analytical Essay Topics

Why do athletes use drugs?
Why is street art so popular?
What are the notions of multicultural societies?
How does body shape influence one’s personality?
Why are gender roles changing?
How does single parenting affect a child’s psychology?
What are some differences in communication between a man and a woman?
How can a career and family life be balanced?
What therapeutic effects does music have?
How can inequality be avoided?

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Educational Analytical Essay Topics

Critically analyze the character of Romeo in the play.
What are the advantages of school uniforms?
How can bullying be avoided in schools?
Why is it important to give sex education in schools?
Are school authorities performing their duties loyally?
How can education standards be increased?
Why is it essential for a college education to be free?
How does higher education ensure better career opportunities?
Why is practical learning more important?
Pros and cons of homeschooling?

Analytical Essay Topics on Health

What are the cons of being a vegetarian
What are the causes of obesity?
How do eating disorders affect mental health?
What are the effects of insomnia?
Are sleeping pills helpful?
Can traditional medicine treat insomnia?
How can the bipolar disorder be treated?
How does cognitive therapy influence mental disorders?
How do antidepressants deal with depression?
What are the disadvantages of free treatment?

Analytical Essay Topics on Education

The impact of technology on classroom learning
Standardized testing: Pros and cons in education
The role of teachers in fostering critical thinking skills
Gender disparities in STEM education
The influence of socioeconomic status on educational attainment
The effectiveness of online learning in higher education
The benefits and drawbacks of inclusive education
The evolution of education in the digital age
Analyzing the flipped classroom approach
The significance of emotional intelligence in education

Analytical Essay Ideas on Literature

Analyzing the symbolism of the green light in "The Great Gatsby."
Exploring the theme of isolation in Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein."
The use of foreshadowing in Shakespeare's tragedies.
The role of women in Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice."
Examining the character development of Ebenezer Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol."
The influence of Greek tragedy on modern theater.
The significance of the "White Whale" in Herman Melville's "Moby-Dick."
The portrayal of war in Ernest Hemingway's "A Farewell to Arms."
Analyzing the use of metaphors in Langston Hughes' poetry.
The impact of colonialism in Chinua Achebe's "Things Fall Apart."

Business Analytical Report Topics

Analyzing the impact of e-commerce on traditional retail businesses.
Assessing supply chain disruptions and resilience strategies in the post-COVID era.
Examining the growth of remote work and its implications for company culture.
Measuring the effectiveness of digital marketing campaigns in driving sales.
Exploring the financial implications of sustainability initiatives in business.
The role of big data analytics in decision-making for business expansion.
Evaluating the competitive landscape of the electric vehicle industry.
Analyzing consumer behavior in the subscription economy.
Assessing the impact of blockchain technology on supply chain transparency.
The economics of gig work: freelancing and its impact on traditional employment.

Persuasive Analytical Essay Topics

Should stronger data privacy regulations be implemented in the digital age?
Should businesses prioritize employee well-being to boost productivity?
Should businesses invest in renewable energy for sustainable practices?
Should inclusive hiring practices be the norm for fostering diversity and innovation?
Should ethical advertising be a legal requirement to build consumer trust?
Should businesses implement a four-day workweek for enhanced productivity?
Should social media platforms face stricter regulations to combat misinformation?
Should businesses embrace circular economy principles for environmental responsibility?
Should universal basic income be implemented to address economic inequality?
Should businesses take a leading role in combating climate change through carbon neutrality?

Political Analysis Essay Topics

Assessing the impact of political polarization on healthcare reform
Analyzing the effect of lobbying on the U.S. healthcare system
The political dimensions of global warming policy: a critical analysis
The role of international diplomacy in addressing global warming
Evaluating the influence of political leaders on climate change mitigation
Political economy and the health system: a comparative study
The intersection of politics and public health: an in-depth examination
Global warming and geopolitical tensions: a political analysis
The impact of political ideologies on environmental policies and global warming
A political analysis of universal healthcare implementation and its challenges

Analytical Essay Topics on Crime

Why are gangs dangerous for societies?
Crime and criminal law
Drug abuse and crime correlation
Women's education and its role in crime prevention
The concept of insanity in criminal law.
What crimes are typical for what ages?
Preventions against acts of terror.
Superwomen in crime and punishment
Analyze the possible ways to lower crime rates.
Cases of police brutality

Analytical Essay Topics on Culture and Society

Analyzing the impact of social media on modern society.
Cultural appropriation: understanding its controversies.
The influence of pop culture on youth behavior.
Gender roles in contemporary society: a critical examination.
Examining the effects of immigration on cultural diversity.
The role of technology in shaping cultural norms.
Analyzing the effects of globalization on local cultures.
Stereotypes in media: their effects on society.
Cultural relativism vs. ethnocentrism: a comparative study.
Exploring the evolution of marriage and family structures in modern society.

Romeo And Juliet Analytical Essay Topics

How is love portrayed in Romeo and Juliet?
Analyze the important scenes.
What makes Mercutio memorable?
Analyze the role played by destiny in Romeo and Juliet.
The significance of Shakespeare’s work in literature.
The role of fate in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet
Analyze the balcony scene in Romeo and Juliet
Do Romeo and Juliet love each other?
Value and duality in Romeo and Juliet
Influence of Romeo and Juliet on modern culture

Analytical Essay Prompts on Nature

Analyze the impact of climate change on ecosystems.
Explore the symbolism of nature in a classic literary work.
Examine the ethical implications of wildlife conservation.
Investigate the role of urban planning in preserving natural spaces.
Analyze the effects of deforestation on global biodiversity.
Discuss the psychological benefits of spending time in nature.
Explore the cultural significance of nature in indigenous societies.
Examine the relationship between technology and our connection to the natural world.
Analyze the impact of pollution on aquatic ecosystems.
Investigate the role of national parks in preserving natural beauty and wi

Hamlet Analytical Essay Topics

The portrayal of women in Hamlet: an analytical examination.
Costume design in Hamlet: a detailed analysis of Hamlet's attire.
The use of comedy in Hamlet: an analytical exploration.
Hamlet's complex relationship with Gertrude: a critical analysis.
Analyzing the film adaptation of 'Hamlet': a cinematic study.
Hamlet's contemplation of suicide: an in-depth analysis.
Was Hamlet truly mad? An analytical investigation.
The act of murder in 'Hamlet': an in-depth analysis.
Truth-seeking methods in Hamlet: an analysis of Hamlet, Laertius, and Polonius.
Character analysis in Hamlet: a comprehensive study of the play's characters.

Analytical Essay Topics for 1984

The Utopian Society in 1984 By George Orwell
The illustration of power.
The theme of totalitarianism in 1984.
The vision of society In 1984
An in-depth analysis of the novel 1984 by George Orwell
Political and social criticism in 1984
The role of technology in 1984
The significance of memory in 1984.
Analyze “1984” referring to the theme of consumerism.
The four essential freedoms and the freedom of fear

Advanced Analytical Essay Topics

Advantages of playing video games for children under 13?
Why is mercy killing legal in some societies?
Why should illegal immigrants not be given equal rights in the country?
How can societal pressure result in alarming mental situations?
How do bold movie topics influence society?
How do teaching methods affect learning?
Why should e-books replace books?
Advantages and disadvantages of homework
Can education bring social change?
How are education and wealth connected?

Traditional Analysis Essay Topics

The Symbolism of Light and Darkness in "Lord of the Flies."
Analyzing the Motif of Revenge in Shakespeare's Plays.
The Role of Women in Victorian Literature.
A Critical Examination of the American Dream in "The Great Gatsby."
Analyzing the Use of Foreshadowing in Edgar Allan Poe's Works.
The Representation of Social Class in Charles Dickens' Novels.
A Literary Analysis of the Tragic Hero in "Macbeth."
The Theme of Isolation in Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein."
Analyzing the Allegory of the Cave in Plato's "The Republic."
The Symbolism of the Green Light in "The Catcher in the Rye."

Funny Analytical Essay Topics

Why do all horror movies have the same plot?
Are animal videos on social media hilarious?
Do violent video games make you aggressive?
Why do people find spam emails more attractive than other emails?
Why is smoking pot helpful in drafting good emails?
Why are jobs for teenagers so terrible?
Why is it hard for girls to decide what to wear?
Why do students like to go to detention?
How does drinking help you give your exam?
Why are school dropouts richer than other college toppers?

Simple Analytical Essay Topics

The impact of social media on personal relationships
Analyzing the themes in a favorite book or movie
Exploring the causes of academic stress among students
The influence of technology on modern communication
Analyzing the effects of fast food on health
The significance of recycling for environmental conservation
The role of education in career success
Examining the benefits and drawbacks of online learning
The impact of music on mood and emotions
Analyzing the causes of teenage rebellion

Best Analytical Essay Topics

Why is it important to be a patriot?
Why are TV shows not suitable for children?
How do children get influenced by violent content on TV?
What are the different forms of addiction?
Why is art education important in colleges?
What are the most popular forms of art?
What are the cons of health insurance?
How does social media affect teenagers?
How does peer pressure work?
What makes people thieves?

Easy Analytical Essay Topics

Why is organ donation significant?
How is graffiti a form of art?
Why is quitting smoking challenging?
Why is sugar harmful to the body?
Why do we sneeze?
Why are firstborn children better in studies than their other younger siblings?
Religion or thoughts - What causes conflicts?
Why is the depression rate increasing in the United States?
Analyze the historical context of abstract art?
Why are young people becoming obese?

Interesting Analytical Essay Topics

How to write good essays without practice?
Why are students who do not pay attention in class smarter?
How is cloning helpful in saving lives?
What are the pros and cons of free education?
How does peer pressure shape personality?
Pros and cons of homework
How to cope with the generation gap?
What are the different types of eating disorders?
What are the symptoms of a heart attack?
How does John Keats use imagery?

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

How to Select the Perfect Analytical Essay Topic?

Choosing the perfect analytical essay topic can be a challenge. In this section, we'll walk you through a step-by-step approach to ensure you choose a topic that not only excites you but also impresses your readers.

Step 1: Understand the Assignment Guidelines

Before you dive into brainstorming, it's crucial to fully grasp what your teacher or professor expects. Check for specific requirements, such as word count, formatting, and any specific themes or guidelines. This understanding will act as your guiding light throughout the topic selection process.

Step 2: Brainstorming and Idea-Generation Techniques

So, what exactly is brainstorming ? It's a process where you generate lots of ideas without worrying about whether they're good or bad. Think of it as a free-flowing river of thoughts.

Here is how to brainstorm:

Start with a mind map. Write your main essay topic in the center and branch out with related subtopics or themes.
In the second step make an outline for each topic. An analytical essay outline helps you visualize connections and discover hidden gems of ideas that you might have missed otherwise.
Next, try freewriting. Set a timer for 10-15 minutes and write anything that comes to your mind about potential essay topics. No need to worry about grammar or structure here.
Lastly, ask yourself questions like "What am I passionate about?" or "What current issues intrigue me?" These questions can stir up fascinating essay topics.

Step 3: Narrow Down Your Options

Now that you have a bunch of ideas, it's time to remove the weaker ones. Consider your personal interest, the available research material, and the essay's requirements.

Narrowing down your options ensures you're left with topics that not only excite you but also meet your essay's needs.

Step 4: Research Potential Topics

Before you make your final choice, do your background search. Research each potential topic briefly to check for available information and whether it aligns with your assignment's goals.

The more you explore, the more likely you are to discover the perfect topic.

Step 5: Consider Your Target Audience

Don't forget your audience! Think about who will read your essay and what topics might resonate with them. A topic that interests your readers can make your essay more engaging and relatable.

Connecting with your audience through your topic choice can turn your essay from "just another assignment" into something people genuinely want to read.

By following these steps, you'll be well on your way to selecting the perfect analytical essay topic.

Summing Up! In order to make your analytical essay perfect, go through some analytical essay examples , or take assistance from our analytical essay writing service .

Our service has experts who provide original essays and papers for all subjects and levels.

You can get your assignment written by the top essay writer service by placing your ' help me write my essay ' request!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Nova Allison is a Digital Content Strategist with over eight years of experience. Nova has also worked as a technical and scientific writer. She is majorly involved in developing and reviewing online content plans that engage and resonate with audiences. Nova has a passion for writing that engages and informs her readers.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

IMAGES

Analogy: Definition and Examples of Analogy in Conversation
Teaching Analogies
ANALOGY ESSAY SAMPLES
Analogy: Definition and Examples of Analogy in Conversation
Top 100 Ideas for Analytical Essay Topics
How to Write an Analytical Essay (with Samples)

VIDEO

Number Analogy Reasoning questions ssc CGL ,ssc MTS,All compatative exam
Critical Thinking 12: Arguments, analogies
What is analogy ? सादृश्यता
Diagram Analysis आकृति परीक्षण Chapter 3 Day-3 site analysis
Reasoning
Numbers Analogy

COMMENTS

Writing Topics for an Essay Developed With Analogies
Experiencing joy. Overcoming an addiction to drugs. Watching a friend destroy himself (or herself) Getting up in the morning. Resisting peer pressure. Discovering a major in college. Cite this Article. Use these 30 writing suggestions to develop an original topic with one or more analogies in a paragraph, essay, or speech.
Descartes Wax Analogy Analysis: [Essay Example], 623 words
Descartes Wax Analogy Analysis. The wax analogy presented by René Descartes in his work "Meditations on First Philosophy" is a thought experiment that explores the nature of reality and the limitations of human perception. In this essay, we will analyze the significance of Descartes' wax analogy and its implications for his philosophy.
Analogy and Analogical Reasoning
An analogy is a comparison between two objects, or systems of objects, that highlights respects in which they are thought to be similar.Analogical reasoning is any type of thinking that relies upon an analogy. An analogical argument is an explicit representation of a form of analogical reasoning that cites accepted similarities between two systems to support the conclusion that some further ...
Analogy Types and Examples
World: Stage. Players: Men and Women. Explanation: In this analogy from Shakespeare's play "As You Like It", the author compares the world to a stage and men and women to players. By examining the relationship between the elements, we can delve into the deeper meaning and message conveyed through this analogy. Identify the Elements:
50 Examples Of Analogies For Critical Thinking
Below, we offer more than 20 different types of analogies and examples of type of analogy as well-which results in nearly 100 examples of analogies overall. Note that because an analogy is simply a pattern established by the nature of a relationship between two 'things,' there are an infinite number of kinds of analogies.
Analogy Essays: Examples, Topics, & Outlines
Inspiring Luminaries: Essays on Personal Influence. Section 1: The Mentor's Mark. The Guiding Light: The Profound Impact of a Wise Mentor. Igniting the Flame: A Tribute to the Teacher Who Shaped My Path. The Architect of My Dreams: Recognizing the Influence of a Lifetime Mentor. Section 2: Role Model Excellence.
Analogy: Definition and Examples
Clear Analogy examples and definition. This article will show you the importance of using Analogy and how to use it. This is a literary device in which two dissimilar objects are compared. ... But in essays, literary analysis, and many other fields, persuasion is the name of the game - and analogy can be a powerful tool for that purpose. It ...
Analogy in Writing
What is an analogy in an essay? Essay writers use analogies as a way of linking two complex ideas and expanding on the point. In an analogy essay, writers compare two different things at length.
What is Analogy (3 Types) and How to Write One?
To give another example, this 1,500+ word article explains how Covid-19 is a reflection of society through an analogy with X-ray. If this long analogy is to be converted to a simile, it would read: COVID-19 is like an X-ray of society. This in fact is the title of the article. When an analogy gets long, it is easily distinguishable from its simile.
Argument by Analogy
Writing an argument by analogy involves a careful comparison of two subjects to illustrate a point. Here's a step-by-step guide to crafting a compelling argument by analogy: Identify the Core Idea: Start with the concept or argument you want to convey. Clearly define the point you are trying to make.
Analogy
Analogy compares two completely different things and look for similarities between two things or concepts and it only focuses on that angle. The use and purpose of analogies may baffle any reader at first but once they would realize how analogies can help writers in making difficult and sensitive topics or things understandable, analogies might be used frequently.
How To Write An Analogy Essay
December 1, 2017 5 min read Worthview. An analogy essay is an essay written to compare two items that are not related. The author has the obligation of analyzing the topics in depth in order to come up with elements that can be found in both items. The analyzation of one item should be deep and in comparison to the other item.
Metaphors and Analogies: How to Use Them in Your Coursework
Analogies make an explicit comparison using these words, while metaphors imply a comparison without any overt indication. There is an obvious difference between their structure. An analogy has two parts; the primary subject, which is unfamiliar, and a secondary subject which is familiar to the reader.
Essay Topic Suggestions to Help You Get Started
Descriptive Essays Comparison and Contrast Essays Process Analysis Essays Exemplification Essays Narrative Essays Analogy Essays Classification Essays. PK-12 & Outreach. Clerc Center | PK-12 & Outreach ... 10 Topic Suggestions for Analogy Essays. 1: Starting a new job: 2: Getting out of debt: 3: Being in a car accident: 4: Falling in love: 5 ...
450 Analytical Essay Topics & Title Ideas for Your Paper
What Are Analytical Essay Topics? An analytical essay is a type of essay where the writer analyzes and evaluates an issue, event, concept, or a work of art. Analytical essay topics are intended to analyze, interpret, and dissect a particular subject. Topics for analysis essays often focus on critical issues that require in-depth exploration and understanding.
analogy analysis essay topics
An analogy is a type of composition (or, more commonly, a part of an essay or speech ) in which one idea, process, or thing is explained by comparing it to something else. Extended analogies are commonly used to make a complex process or idea easier to understand.
Explore Analogy Essay Examples for Free at StudyMoose
An analogy is a comparison in which an idea or a thing is compared to another thing that is quite different from it. It aims at explaining that idea or thing by comparing it to something that is familiar. Metaphors and similes are tools used to draw an analogy.. But in order to answer this question clearly, we need to define some key terms.
Analogy Essay Examples
Persuasive speech or essays utilize strategies such as inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, the argument from analogy, argument from causes and effects, and circular reasoning among others. With this light, this essay analyzes Nancy Reagan speech, "Just Say No" to determine how it has utilized some of the persuasive strategies or concepts. ...
240+ Analytical Essay Topics For Students
Analytical Essay Topics for 1984. The Utopian Society in 1984 By George Orwell. The illustration of power. The theme of totalitarianism in 1984. The vision of society In 1984. An in-depth analysis of the novel 1984 by George Orwell. Political and social criticism in 1984. The role of technology in 1984.
Analogy Essay Topics
Figure - 1 An example of an analogy shown between a water circuit and an electric circuit appears below in Figures - 2 and Figures - Get more content on StudyHub. The Usefulness of the Analogy Between Society and a Biological Organism One set of sociologist that use the Biological or Organic analogy of societies are the Functionalists.

30 Writing Topics: Analogy

Thirty Topic Suggestions: Analogy

Descartes Wax Analogy Analysis

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Reality

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Bibliography

Analogy and Analogical Reasoning

1. Introduction: the many roles of analogy

2. Analogical arguments

3. Criteria for evaluating analogical arguments

3.3.1 Requirement of material analogy

3.3.2 Causal condition

3.3.3 No-essential-difference condition

3.5.1 Connectionist models

3.5.2 Articulation model

3.6.1 Norton’s material theory of analogy

3.6.2 Field-specific criteria

3.6.3 Formal analogies in physics

4. Philosophical foundations for analogical reasoning

4.2.1 Single-case induction

4.2.2 Sampling arguments

4.2.3 Argument from past success

5. Beyond analogical arguments

Other Internet Resources

Support SEP

A Comprehensive Guide to Analogy In Literary Comparisons

Understanding Analogy

Distinction between Simile, Metaphor, and Analogy

Why Use Analogies in Literature

How to Use Analogies

Know Your Audience

Keep it Relevant

Use Simple and Familiar Comparisons

Highlight Key Similarities

Make it Visual

Provide Context

Use Analogies Sparingly

How to Look for and Analyze Analogies

Was This Blog Helpful?

I. What is an Analogy?

II. Examples of Analogy

III. Types of Analogy

b. Figurative Analogy

IV. The Importance of Analogy

a. Make abstract ideas more concrete

b. Add depth and feeling to an image

c. Making a persuasive argument

V. Examples of Analogy in Literature

VI. Examples of Analogy in Pop Culture

VII. Related Terms

Example of an analogy versus simile and metaphor:

List of Terms

What is Analogy (3 Types) and How to Write One?

What is an analogy?

1. Analogies with proportionate relationship

2. Analogies building on similes

3. Analogies with no particular pattern

How to write analogies?

Participate in a short survey

Analogy 3 and 4

Examples of Word Analogies

More Analogy Examples for You to Solve

Examples of Analogies for Critical Thinking

More Examples for you to Solve:

Analogy Examples in Sentence

Examples of Analogy in Literature

Types of Analogy

How to Write an Analogy

When to Use Analogy

How Does Analogy Work

25 Examples of Analogies

2. Finding a Good Man is Like Finding a Needle in a Haystack

3. Just as a Sword is the Weapon of a Warrior, a Pen is the Weapon of a Writer

4. That’s as Useful as Rearranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic.

5. How a Doctor Diagnoses Diseases are Like How a Detective Investigates Crimes

6. Explaining a Joke is Like Dissecting a Frog