It is not clear which analogy is being referred to in the question. However, assuming the analogy being discussed is related to the statements provided, here is an evaluation of how these statements could affect an analogy:
1. Societies do have control over the laws they make:
This statement does not necessarily make the analogy unsound. It supports the idea that societies have the ability to establish and change laws, which can be comparable to an individual's capacity to establish personal rules or regulations. However, the specific analogy being considered would need to be analyzed to determine its validity.
2. Controlling personal car use takes minimal effort:
If this statement is part of the analogy, it may weaken its soundness. Comparing the ease of controlling personal car use to societies controlling laws is likely to be an overgeneralization. The issue of car usage is complex and involves various factors such as infrastructure, transportation systems, and individual choices. Therefore, claiming that controlling personal car use takes minimal effort may not be accurate or relevant to the analogy.
3. Rules and laws always have some exceptions:
This statement does not necessarily make an analogy unsound. Exceptions to rules and laws are common and can be accounted for in certain analogies. However, the specific analogy being evaluated would need to be assessed to determine if the presence of exceptions affects its overall validity.
To evaluate the soundness of an analogy, it is crucial to consider the specific analogy itself and how accurately it represents the intended comparison.
What makes this analogy unsound?
Societies do have control over the laws they make.
Controlling personal car use takes minimal effort.
Rules and laws always have some exceptions.
1 answer