The Problem with Analogies in Public Discourse

Analogies can be useful for introducing new concepts or explaining something complex in simple terms, by comparing something known and familiar with a new idea. However, analogies can also cause more problems than they solve during debates over controversial topics.

Photo by Emily Morter

The Limits of Usefulness of Analogies and Metaphors

Analogies, metaphors and similes can help us rethink a long held idea and sidestep the entrenched mental blocks that protect it by considering the topic from a different perspective and building empathy for someone else’s point of view, which can be helpful for weeding out incorrect or overly narrow ideas one might have. These tools are most useful when there is established trust and respect, such as between a teacher and student, close friends, a leader speaking to her supporters, or if the subject is an uncontroversial poetic observation.

The problem with analogies is the limits of their usefulness by politicians or influencers working to build consensus on public issues of importance, and the tendency to generate more divisive arguments instead. When comparing things by way of analogy in public discourse, people often argue about whether there are actually more similarities or more differences between them, even though all analogies by definition are both similar in some ways and intentionally different in other ways.

A heartbroken teenager could list a dozen ways that love really is a battlefield, but a war veteran could tell you that the horrors of active combat are far worse than a high school break up. Let’s look at a couple recent examples of analogies gone awry.

OK Boomer” Compared To N-Word

In late 2019, conservative radio host Bob Lonsberry tweeted “‘Boomer’ is the n-word of ageism.” Then in early 2020, University of Oklahoma Professor Peter Gade purportedly said to his class “Calling someone a boomer is like calling someone a n—–.” (Gade’s use of the racially charged n-word was ill advised, and he has since apologized for it, but I’d like to focus here on the analogy being made.)

These comments were made in response to the phase “OK Boomer” which had recently gained in popular usage, frequently with a dismissive and pejorative intention toward an older adult from the Baby Boomer generation. The comments sparked outrage and condemnation for their comparison.

The reality is that the phrase “OK Boomer”, when used dismissively, can be insensitive and offensive to an older person or toward the older population in general, and is often a stereotypical gross generalization which could even manifest as ageist discrimination depending on the context. Similarly, calling younger adults from the Millennial generation “snowflakes” can be a condescending and dismissive metaphor, based on a stereotype that a Millennial is fragile and overly concerned with being seen as special.

These derogatory terms do share some similarities with the n-word, in that they can be insensitive, unfairly reductive, and discriminatory. “Boomer” and “snowflake” are also vastly dissimilar to the n-word, most obviously that they have not been associated with mass enslavement, oppression and debasement of an entire race of people.

In this case the analogy inflamed racial tensions, and arguably failed to generate consensus. Older people may focus on the similarities and find agreement in the comments, and young or black people may focus on the dissimilarities and find the comments offensive.

In order to overcome generational differences and divisions between young and old people and reach toward consensus on important issues such as economic opportunity and race relations, we must bring civility and mutual respect to discussions. To this end, we should look passed the limitations of an analogy, and acknowledge that we should avoid being insensitive, dismissive or discriminatory with terms or phrases like “OK Boomer” or “snowflake”, much in the same way we have ejected the n-word from rational discussion.

COVID-19 Compared to Influenza

President Trump has compared COVID-19 to Influenza on several occasions. On October 6, he tweeted “We have learned to live with [the Flu], just like we are learning to live with Covid…”

As with all analogous comparisons, COVID-19 is similar to the season flu in some ways, and also dissimilar in other ways. There are some of the same symptoms between them, but more than 3 times the number of people have died from COVID-19 in less than a year compared to typical flu deaths in a year, in part because it does not have a vaccine yet as influenza does.

COVID-19 and the corresponding social distancing and masking measures have lead to conflicting information, heated debates and reopen protests, as issues of health and safety have sometimes clashed with economic issues and the value of freedom.

For these reasons, it is not particularly helpful to use analogies to discuss whether or not COVID-19 is like the flu, because it is and it isn’t. Instead, we need to consider what number of deaths is enough to justify declaring a public health emergency, what level of government intervention is appropriate to protect the public against such a threat, and which precautions are reasonable for individuals to take to protect themselves and their families.

These are difficult questions which require scientific data to inform our policies and decision making, rather than broad generalizations. This requires a level of trust in the good faith efforts of leaders, experts and institutions working to inform and equip us with tools we need to overcome the pandemic. We must work to protect, and where needed restore, the high standards of decency and honesty in all of our leaders so that in difficult times of uncertainty and unrest, we are able to build some consensus about the correct course of action to overcome it. That kind of consensus must be built on good data, rather than oversimplified generalities and comparisons.

Judgement of Police Compared To Discrimination of Black People

10/14/20: Here is an example of criticism over comparing discrimination against a blue uniform to discrimination against black skin.

Retired Columbus Police Chief Kim Jacobs said, “if we insert ‘uniform he wore’ instead of ‘color of his skin,’ we also find presumptions of guilt, unfair condemnation and guilt by association.” Columbus Alive contributor Scott Woods finds offensive “the comparison of being treated unfairly by the public — without experiencing any actual or systemic physical harm, and all while fearing more for their pensions than their lives — with being wrongfully imprisoned, illegally convicted and sentenced to death row.”

Jacobs may have a valid point that individual cops are unfairly condemned for actions of other individual cops. However, by using a direct analogy to racism against black people, Jacobs’ point may be undermined rather than achieving consensus. The emotional appeal is likely to resonate with some, while coming off as insensitive to many others like Woods, further dividing on the already tense subject.

Conclusion

Analogies have a great deal of usefulness in certain contexts, but can also be a source of division and unhelpful debate in the age of Twitter arguments, Facebook meme-wars and troll-filled comment sections. We need our policy makers, media influencers, community leaders and educators to bring a keen understanding of the facts and share more data-driven specifics when dealing with the more challenging and contentious issues of our time.

Further reading

Another rhetorical problem is alleging hypocrisy with, “The same people who say X are now saying Y”, but not giving any examples of people who actually said both X and Y. It’s often a way to criticize “the left” or “the right”, but actually thinking of different people within that “side” who said each separately. Those people might legitimately disagree with each other, but the critic flattens them into a single worldview, perpetuating a left/right false dichotomy.

Here’s a nice expansion on this idea with examples: When pundits say ‘the same people,’ they usually mean different people

140 Comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *