Recognize the distinction
An analogy compares a known case with a new case. Its strength depends on the mechanism connecting their similarities to the predicted outcome. Two towns can both have ferries yet differ in the time and source of their traffic congestion. A difference matters when it changes the reason the original policy worked, not merely because any difference can be named.
Choose a method
Identify the original result, the feature proposed to explain it, and the new case's corresponding feature. Then ask what additional fact would make transfer safer or less safe. A critical difference weakens an analogy; an additional relevant similarity can strengthen it. Do not demand that two cases be identical in every respect.
Worked contrast
Evening ferries will not address congestion caused by deliveries at dawn unless the plan also changes those deliveries. The color of ferry tickets does not address the mechanism. In the restaurant example, uncovered autumn seating faces a weather constraint absent during a dry summer. A weatherproof canopy could remove that relevant difference.
Transfer and check
Try evaluating the same policy in two schools with different scheduling patterns. State one difference that affects the policy mechanism and one that does not. A useful explanation connects a named difference to the expected result. Simply writing the situations are different leaves the central reasoning unfinished.
A mainland city reduced congestion after adding evening ferries. An island town is also considering evening ferries. An advocate concludes: Evening ferries will reduce congestion in the island town. Which statement is the advocate's main conclusion?
- The advocate offers these observations: A mainland city reduced congestion after adding evening ferries. An island town is also considering evening ferries.
- The target claim is introduced as what the advocate concludes: Evening ferries will reduce congestion in the island town.
- Identifying a conclusion does not require accepting it; the task concerns its argumentative role.
Compare the other answer choices
This is a stated premise, offered as evidence rather than the target conclusion.
This is background or supporting information, not the claim the advocate infers.
This adds a stronger claim than the advocate actually states.
This is a possible counterfinding, not the claim the advocate aims to establish.
Try it, then explain it.
Complete a short set without looking at the example. After each answer, explain which evidence or rule supports your decision and why the alternatives do not fit.
Sources & authorship
Original Slope explanations and examples. References support the concepts; they are not the source of copied questions. Independent educator review is pending.
Logical Reasoning skills