Read on Twitter
But, also, I've been thinking about these kinds of false equivalencies and why they're so prevalent. I think it's the difference between a parallel case argument and an argument by analogy. Explanation below. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1326883902561071104
Parallel case argument: two things or situations are essentially the same. The strength of this kind of argument is in explaining all of the ways that the cases are the same so that we can reasonably conclude that what is true in case 1 is also true in case 2.
Argument by analogy: the relationship between two things is similar to the relationship between two other things. The things are not the same, but the relationships between the things are. The strength of these arguments rests with the accuracy of the analogies & comparison.
So, Jake's point above:
Parallel case: President & Admin preventing peaceful transition of power, withholding information & funding to new administration is like Love Boat star making fun of Trump.
Clearly this isn't a parallel case. The two are ridiculously different.
Parallel case: President & Admin preventing peaceful transition of power, withholding information & funding to new administration is like Love Boat star making fun of Trump.
Clearly this isn't a parallel case. The two are ridiculously different.
Argument by analogy:
Trump preventing transition: Love Boat star insult
In what way could this analogy be true? Not prima facie (that would be a parallel case), but in the relationships that each has to "political norms" or "giving respect to the opposition."
Trump preventing transition: Love Boat star insult
In what way could this analogy be true? Not prima facie (that would be a parallel case), but in the relationships that each has to "political norms" or "giving respect to the opposition."
Violating Dem Norms: Trump preventing transition Violating Dem Norms: Love Boat star insult
or, perhaps
Giving Respect to Opp: Trump preventing transition
Giving Respect to Opp: Love Boat star insult
or, perhaps
Giving Respect to Opp: Trump preventing transition
Giving Respect to Opp: Love Boat star insult
Even still, you might say (correctly): you can't compare Trump to a Love Boat star! Like, that is ridiculous. It is, but hang on--because this is what I've been thinking about.
It isn't logically equivalent, but it feels equivalent.
It isn't logically equivalent, but it feels equivalent.
The comparison isn't actually valid, but it feels valid. It feels metaphorically true, though it makes no sense. People don't think about the argument structure/evidence, but focus on their emotional reaction to the first part of the analogies: Violating Dem Norms & Respect
Why? Outrage, motivated reasoning, extreme us/them polarization, etc. trigger folks. Violating Dem Noms/Respecting Opp are outrage bait for people's feels. It makes it feel like it's equivalent to deny a peaceful transition of power when the Love Boat star insults the president.
