|When an opponent’s analogy is distorted to mean something broader or more narrow than intended.||Tom said life is like a river in that those who spend the energy to maneuver their boats to the middle of the river will see more during their lifetime. This is ridiculous since he can not explained where the boats come from.|
|Analogies are intrinsically imperfect. But this does not negate their utility or strength. Legitimate parallels offer insight and may need to be addressed. The fact that television is not ingested does not mean an addition to alcohol can not serve as a informative analogy to an addition to television.
This is a type of straw-man fallacy.
Case Study One
If person A claims their “loving” god will eternally torture the humans he created if they disobey him, and person B claims this is analogous to a “loving” human father eternally torturing his children if they disobey, for person A would unjustifiably pervert the analogy if they were to claim that the analogy does hold for irrelevant reasons such as “the human father is not righteous” or “human fathers don’t live eternally”.
Case Study Two
If person A claims religious faith gives people joy that hides and prevents other possible joys in life in the same way that cocaine gives junkies joy at the expense of other possible joys in life, person B would unjustifiably pervert the analogy if they were to claim that the analogy does hold for irrelevant reasons such as “cocaine is not legal” or “people with faith serve God.”
Keep in mind that a fallacious argument does not entail an erroneous position.