Work on analogy has been done from a number of disciplinary perspectives throughout the history of Western thought. This work is a multidisciplinary guide to theorizing about analogy. It contains 1,406 references, primarily to journal articles and monographs, and primarily to English language material. classical through to contemporary sources are included. The work is classified into eight different sections (with a number of subsections). A brief introduction to each section is provided. Keywords and key expressions of importance to research on (...) analogy are discussed in the introductory material. Electronic resources for conducting research on analogy are listed as well. (shrink)

The nosological diagnosis is a particular type of nontheoretical diagnosis consisting of identifying the disease that afflicts the patient without explaining the underlying etiopathological mechanisms. Its origins are within the essentialist point of view on the nature of diseases, which dates back at least to 18th-century taxonomy studies. In this article, we propose a model of nosological diagnosis as a two-phase process composed of the categorization of inductive inferences and argumentations by analogy. In the inductive phase, disease entities are identified (...) by means of typicality-based categorization processes, and meaningful clinical samples are learned ; in the subsequent phase, those samples are used as the bases of argumentations by analogy to obtain a diagnosis for a given patient. This model extends the prototype resemblance theory of disease including also the exemplar theory proposed in cognitive science and, moreover, it frames the clinical activity of nosological diagnosis and how it can be explained within the theory of argumentation. According to it, diagnosis based on the recognition of a typical syndrome is explained in terms of the prototype theory of categorization and the antisymmetrical argumentation by analogy, while diagnosis based on a comparison with a previous clinical case is explained by the exemplar theory of categorization and by the symmetrical argumentation by analogy. (shrink)

Riassunto: Lo scopo di questo lavoro è fornire una spiegazione filosofico-cognitiva della diagnosi nosologica legando i classici temi filosofici delle forme del ragionamento scientifico con gli aspetti cognitivi del ragionamento di senso comune. In filosofia della medicina sono state proposte varie teorie della diagnosi per analizzare e spiegare il ragionamento diagnostico; una di queste è la diagnosi nosologica: un particolare tipo di diagnosi a-teorica e basata sulla similarità. In questo lavoro mostriamo come la diagnosi nosologica si possa considerare come un (...) procedimento scientifico composto sia da processi induttivi di categorizzazione e concettualizzazione che di argomentazioni per analogia; i processi di categorizzazione coinvolti sono spiegabili usando due delle teorie dei concetti proposte nella scienza cognitiva: la teoria dei prototipi e la teoria degli esemplari; mentre le argomentazioni usate sono analogie sia simmetriche che anti-simmetriche. Infine, presentiamo un modello della diagnosi nosologica che lega in un quadro coerente queste precedenti analisi; in questo modello la diagnosi nosologica basata sul riconoscimento del quadro morboso tipico, la sindrome, è spiegata in termini di teoria dei prototipi e di argomentazioni analogiche anti-simmetriche; mentre la diagnosi nosologica basata su di un precedente caso clinico è spiegata con la teoria degli esemplari e con le usuali argomentazioni analogiche simmetriche. Parole chiave: Diagnosi; Categorizzazione; Analogia; Induzione; Nosologia Analogical Arguments and Categorization Processes in Nosological Diagnosis -: The purpose of this work is to provide a philosophical-cognitive explanation of nosological diagnosis by linking the classical philosophical themes of scientific reasoning to cognitive aspects of common sense reasoning. In philosophy of medicine, various theories of diagnosis have been proposed to analyze and explain diagnostic reasoning; one of these is nosological diagnosis: a particular type of atheoretical diagnosis based on similarity. In this paper, we show how nosological diagnosis can be considered as a scientific process composed of both inductive processes of categorization and argumentation by analogy; the categorization processes involved can be explained using two of the theories of concepts proposed in cognitive science: the theory of prototypes and the theory of exemplars; while argumentation uses both symmetrical and anti-symmetrical analogies. Finally, we present a model of nosological diagnosis that binds these previous analyses into a coherent framework; in this model, nosological diagnosis based on the recognition of a typical syndrome is explained in terms of prototype theory and anti-symmetrical analogical argumentation; while nosological diagnosis based on previous clinical case studies is explained by the theory of exemplars and the usual symmetrical analogical argumentation. Keywords: Diagnosis; Categorization; Analogy; Induction; Nosology. (shrink)

The study of threat and fear appeal arguments has given rise to a sizeable literature. Even within a public health context, much is now known about how these arguments work to gain the public’s compliance with health recommendations. Notwithstanding this level of interest in, and examination of, these arguments, there is one aspect of these arguments that still remains unexplored. That aspect concerns the heuristic function of these arguments within our thinking about public health problems. Specifically, it is argued that (...) threat and fear appeal arguments serve as valuable shortcuts in our reasoning, particularly when that reasoning is subject to biases that are likely to diminish the effectiveness of public health messages. To this extent, they are rationally warranted argument forms rather than fallacies, as has been their dominant characterization in logic. (shrink)

The Covid-19 pandemic presents argumentation theorists with an opportunity to reflect on the ways in which people, agencies and governments respond to the emergence of a new virus. Reponses have revealed a range of judgements and decisions, not all of which are rationally warranted. This article will examine errors in reasoning, several of which have reduced the public’s compliance with important health measures. This article will also analyse rationally warranted reasoning about Covid-19 employed by public health agencies. In examining instances (...) of good and bad reasoning during the Covid-19 pandemic, we can begin to construct a taxonomy of arguments that facilitated and hindered individual and collective responses during this public health emergency. (shrink)

The world’s scientific community must be in a state of constant readiness to address the threat posed by newly emerging infectious diseases. Whether the disease in question is SARS in humans or BSE in animals, scientists must be able to put into action various disease containment measures when everything from the causative pathogen to route(s) of transmission is essentially uncertain. A robust epistemic framework, which will inform decision-making, is required under such conditions of uncertainty. I will argue that this framework (...) should have reasoning at its center and, specifically, that forms of reasoning beyond deduction and induction should be countenanced by scientists who are confronted with emerging infectious diseases. In previous articles, I have presented a case for treating certain so-called traditional informal fallacies as rationally acceptable forms of argument that can facilitate scientific inquiry when little is known about an emerging disease. In this article, I want to extend that analysis by highlighting the unique features of these arguments that makes them specially adapted to cope with conditions of uncertainty. Of course, such a view of the informal fallacies must at least be consistent with the reasoning practices of scientists, and particularly those scientists (viz. epidemiologists) whose task it is to track and respond to newly emerging infectious diseases. To this end, I draw upon examples of scientific reasoning from the UK’s BSE crisis, a crisis that posed a significant threat to both human and animal health. (shrink)