Analogy of Idea to World

introbert August 31, 2022 at 23:03 2425 views 10 comments

It is common to hear in discussions of psychology of the important role analogy plays in thought and perception. However, in philosophy I think analogy is often overlooked as the powerful rational method that it is. Before I get to the method of analogy, I would like to discuss something that is not conventionally understood to be analogical: Idea and world. In analogical terms idea : world::representation : represented . This can be summarized as ideas are representations of the world. At least a partial equivocation has been drawn between idea and representation. Given that an analogy defines relationships between things, and the ideas we have of the world are analogies, I can state: relationship: analogy:: representation : idea. This can be summarized as relationships are representations of the idea of analogy. Because at least partial equivocations have been drawn between items they can be coherently unified.

When discussing analogy of idea to world there are important matters regarding nature of reality, indirect/ direct realism and things like platonic dualism, noumenon/ phenomenon etc. This is a vast topic but I only want to apply the analogical method I had been discussing in the previous paragraph to something more simple to serve as an example. If idea is only representation and analogy only implies relationship then the ideas/ perceptions of the world serve as a representation that gives the perceiver some relationship to the world. However it is only analogy because our perception of the world is not the world only something with some relationship to it. Given this I will use the analogical method to establish a 'fact' about this analogy. misperception : indirect realism :: unexpected: irony,
irony: direct realism:: heel: achilles, achilles: greek army:: direct realism: niavete

Anyway I ended on a humorous note, to me anyway, but I just wanted to underline analogy as a rational logical system for drawing conclusions and making arguments.

Comments (10)

Mww September 01, 2022 at 11:01 #734980
Quoting introbert
If idea is only representation and analogy only implies relationship then the ideas/ perceptions of the world serve as a representation that gives the perceiver some relationship to the world.


While that may be necessary, it isn’t sufficient, insofar as no account is given for what the relationship is, or how it manifests, and consequently, what is to be done with it.

Good start. What’s next?
introbert September 01, 2022 at 16:26 #735063
I suppose the point of the statement you refer to is to justify analogy and the method I describe (which I make no claim of originating or ownership to) as an acceptable means of drawing conclusions given that our experience of reality is limited to mere ideas that just have a relationship to the world. This at the very least is a way of justifying the weaknesses in the method.
T Clark September 01, 2022 at 19:24 #735091
Quoting introbert
an analogy defines relationships between things


An analogy defines a relationship between relationships. The relationship between my hand and my glove can be considered analogous to that between my foot and my shoe, but the idea of a shoe is not analogous to that unnamed thing in the world which covers my foot.
introbert September 01, 2022 at 22:26 #735125
Well that is my contention, even though I require charity, that the ideas of a shoe and foot are only a relationship to shoe and foot. They are not, in fact, the shoe and the foot in any way except that they are analogous. This I guess could be represented by- idea of shoe: idea of foot:: shoe : foot. This seems trivial, but the reason for this is some things, a lot of things, are not to be taken for granted like a shoe or a foot. For example if I say some abstraction of shoe like fashion, and some abstraction of foot like body then I could say- fashion:body::shoe:foot in this case I am saying the same thing as idea of shoe and idea of foot, but it more clearly exemplifies the relational nature of idea and perception to the world. Regarding the point that I erred in saying analogy defines a relationship between things, I was merely referring to the relationship mirrored in our minds of the relationships between things in the world.
introbert September 01, 2022 at 22:52 #735139
Ok, let me try to explain this a little better. I work a day job as a mechanic, so if it seems I am letting my topics lapse, I apologize.

Basically, I enjoy this method of reasoning. Using the analogical formula to make connections and associations between things, to reach interesting conclusions and make arguments has been a pastime of mine and has used up many notebook pages. I simply wanted to share the joy of using analogies as a method of reasoning with others who share a fondness for philosophy.

The paragraphs I have written above are basically my way of justifying the method by using the method. I am a firm adherent of indirect realism to the extent that not only do I believe the world is not necessarily as we perceive it, but that the exact relational nature of the world has to be uncovered through thought and without using the analogical method, for instance, the relationships between many things in the world would not be perceptible to us. Furthermore, the relationships we uncover can situate us in another reality from those who see none.
Agent Smith September 02, 2022 at 06:59 #735252
I wholeheartedly agree with the OP. Analogies extract the pattern from pragmata (issues); the next step is to come up with a specific instance of that motif. The objective varies - from trying to drive home a point (philosophy proper) to exposing bad thinking in a jocular fashion (rhetoric).

Mww September 02, 2022 at 09:26 #735264
Quoting introbert
the exact relational nature of the world has to be uncovered through thought


THAT’S what’s next.
T Clark September 02, 2022 at 18:14 #735335
Reply to introbert

I think you are responding to me, but I'm not sure. It would be helpful if you put in links to previous posts to make that clear.

Quoting introbert
Well that is my contention, even though I require charity, that the ideas of a shoe and foot are only a relationship to shoe and foot. They are not, in fact, the shoe and the foot in any way except that they are analogous.


As you noted, there is a lot of discussion claiming that much of human thought is based on analogy. That makes a lot of sense to me. It certainly is consistent with my own experience of my own inner life. That kind of analogy connects new experiences about the world with existing ones which allows new ideas to be incorporated in a consistent world view. Analogy is how ideas are connected with each other. It's how the world is classified and how distinctions are made.

Quoting introbert
Basically, I enjoy this method of reasoning. Using the analogical formula to make connections and associations between things, to reach interesting conclusions and make arguments has been a pastime of mine and has used up many notebook pages. I simply wanted to share the joy of using analogies as a method of reasoning with others who share a fondness for philosophy.


I feel the same way, although I like to call them metaphors rather than analogies. That sounds cooler and all intellectual and artistic and stuff.

Quoting introbert
I believe the world is not necessarily as we perceive it, but that the exact relational nature of the world has to be uncovered through thought and without using the analogical method,


Again, analogies are relationships between ideas, not relationships between ideas and reality.
introbert September 02, 2022 at 19:14 #735353
This seems to be a sticking point: relationship between ideas and reality. I seem to think reality is the relational nature of the world, epitomized by the analogy between thoughts and their relationship to stuff in the world. So reality is not ideal or so real. Reality as I see it can change as the relationship between ideas and world change. Relationships change in the world all the time and the analogous ideas we get of those relationships also change, but the analogy doesnt have to be so direct, it can by degrees abstracted from the original object. Look to the relationship between man and woman. Woman(was to)man::slave:master; now, feminist:patriarchy::freedom fighter : tyranny. Nothing has changed in these analogies but relationship AND reality! Reply to T Clark
introbert September 05, 2022 at 19:20 #736340
Not a bump, but just wanted to apologize to anyone who may have read what I had written that is now deleted.