Two Ways of Analogy

Extending the Study of Analogies to Mathematical Domains

Bibliographic Data

ID10705278
AuthorsDirk Schlimm (0000-0002-2476-2611, McGill University, corresponding author)
Year2008
Volume75
Issue2
Pages178-200
Publication date2008-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePhilosophy of Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8248 • E-ISSN: 1539-767X
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1086/590198
OpenAlexW1964121193
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited37

The structure-mapping theory has become the de facto standard account of analogies in cognitive science and philosophy of science. In this paper I propose a distinction between two kinds of domains and I show how the account of analogies based on structure-preserving mappings fails in certain (object-rich) domains, which are very common in mathematics, and how the axiomatic approach to analogies, which is based on a common linguistic description of the analogs in terms of laws or axioms, can be used successfully to explicate analogies of this kind. Thus, the two accounts of analogies should be regarded as complementary, since each of them is adequate for explicating analogies that are drawn between different kinds of domains. In addition, I illustrate how the account of analogies based on axioms has also considerable practical advantages, for example, for the discovery of new analogies

Analogy · Axiom · Cognitive science · Epistemology · Object (grammar) · Property (philosophy) · Artificial Intelligence · Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies · Computer Science · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access