an analogy, like all forms of simile or metaphor, is supposed to be revealing. you deploy an analogy in a rhetorical argument in order to shed light on something, to help someone grasp what you're saying conceptually, or to create new, innovative meanings.
your 'facility' for analogy extends to comparing everything to world war 2, i'm guessing because that subject comprises 95% of your bookshelf and lifetime's reading, and to make everything about nazis/the holocaust/jews or, more recently, about some vague and not quite historically defined 'china' from the early-mid 20th century. none of it makes any sense and just leads to headscratching, not analogical insight.
do better.
your 'facility' for analogy extends to comparing everything to world war 2, i'm guessing because that subject comprises 95% of your bookshelf and lifetime's reading, and to make everything about nazis/the holocaust/jews or, more recently, about some vague and not quite historically defined 'china' from the early-mid 20th century. none of it makes any sense and just leads to headscratching, not analogical insight.
do better.
Last edited by uziq (2020-12-31 05:22:48)