"In a clever bit of rhetoric, people who opposed mask and vaccine mandates during the last pandemic used pro-choice terms. For example, a person opposed to getting vaccinated might say "my body, my choice." This phrase is, of course, a standard part of pro-choice language. While some who did this were no doubt engaged in bad faith rhetoric or trolling, the analogy between abortion rights and the right to refuse vaccination is worth considering."
"An argument by analogy will typically have two premises and a conclusion. The first premise establishes the analogy by showing that the things (X and Y) in question are similar in certain respects (properties P, Q, R, etc.). The second premise establishes that X has an additional quality, Z. The conclusion asserts that Y has property or feature Z as well. The form of the argument looks like this:"
"One simplified way to present the anti-vaccine (or pro-vaccine choice) analogy is as follows: Premise 1: The right to choose an abortion is analogous to the right to choose to not be vaccinated. Premise 2: The right to choose an abortion is supported by the left. Conclusion: The right to choose to not be vaccinated should also be supported by the left."
An argument by analogy typically has two premises and a conclusion. The first premise establishes similarities between X and Y by listing shared properties P, Q, R. The second premise attributes an additional property Z to X. The conclusion infers that Y also has property Z. The anti-vaccine analogy frames X as the right to choose abortion and Y as the right to refuse vaccination, claiming shared features and political support. The analogy's strength depends on how closely the shared properties bear on the contested feature Z and whether critical dissimilarities undermine the inference.
Read at A Philosopher's Blog
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]