A false analogy is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone applies facts from one situation to another situation but the situations are substantially different and the same conclusions cannot logically be drawn.
That final semester I usually sat in the front row, near the teacher. Not that it was something I could be proud of, yet English classes were the best and most relieved ones after any major subjects. Although the topics were something redundant and regular—nothing as algebraic as other subjects or whatnot—that I could be sleepy listening impatiently to her speeches, I should agree that I like the way Miss Malathi made me impress upon her, or at least I like the idea who she is to me, a great teacher. Once she got into a topic, no one could escape from her pile of questions. Moreover, if the lucky person sat near her while she walked around the class.
Under the table, as always, I was with my phone. Nothing extraordinary. I just had to keep scrolling on the screen as I got easily distracted by the weather. We got English classes at 3 PM and I started to think about foods. Shhhhh, it wasn’t the real deal there. We were up to discuss an essay, about teenagers and the (rise of social) problems among them, stuff like that, until she took one card out of her pile of thoughts, asking “Why did it happen that way?” As if she were pinpointing utterly to the problems, not the doers or other circumstances.
Family ignore their children’s pursuits and emotions..
Parents show them no good characters and role play..
“Curiosity kills the cat”..
Of friends and requests..
And other stereotypical insinuation any students would gladly elaborate them out. She continued talking about beliefs, religions and surroundings as time passed by. “…as to how these all correlate in the atmosphere of being grown-ups yada yada and the lifestyles yada yada we may create.” I remember that word “correlate” and how someone else mistook it as “co-exist”. She then started making comparisons, so I jotted down what I heard. Perhaps later the words would eventually and slowly reappear in my mind.
“You know, back in my days..” she stared at the board, searching for words, then looked back into our eyes. “Parents would pressure and teach the children about religion so that their children would conscious of our actions and decisions. Different from as how it is perceptible as nowadays’ appearances, parents or families rarely put any concern on this matter. You know what I mean, right…”
I pondered over her speech, questioning every solitary piece she mentioned ever since. I wondered why she compared it that way, or why she came up to such conclusions. I wasn’t saying that it is a crime to have such thoughts, nope. If really it was about parents who solely had to watch over their children, then who were to be blamed—the ones who stop the teachings? Oh, wait. It got nothing to do with blaming each other or the teachings. It wasn’t about putting the blames on, I knew. Somehow it just sounded less reasonable to me. I was upset that she really left me hanging between “iman tidak dapat diwarisi” and “siapa berhak ke atas siapa”. Though I guessed kalau dia tanya aku apa definisi iman pun, baik aku tutup mulut kejap. I was sure she had better explanations—or theories at least—on the topic we first talked about if she intended to be quite assertive. Nonetheless, it was her individual opinion from her past experiences and I respected her even for that. Far from that, I knew she was going to say, make your religion as a way of a better life.
“Or.. when you commit bad or good deeds, do you even remember God? That God’s watching over you the entire time? That He knows it either in dark side or bright side?” I heard that too. “How about you, do you fear your God?” She spoke to the class, then repeated it as we got jinxed under her ‘spell’. I had a quite thoughtful moment there, I assumed.
“Because I do. I do fear of my God.”
It wasn’t a mere discussion I got in English classes. It was a lesson for life. That sometimes teachers won’t ultimately give us the damn answers, but they show us how to figure it out for betterment, for concealed purposes. My friend once said, semua orang boleh buat kebaikan for the sake of humanity bila mana dia nak, tanpa perlu dia timbulkan isu keagamaan sekalipun. Sebab agama mana pun akan ajar kita untuk tingkatkan moral values dalam hidup, amalkan yang baik-baik itu ini. By comparing the atmosphere of teachings dahulu, kini mahupun bila-bila, banyak lagi faktor yang memberi impak sebenarnya dari masa ke masa. Environments, social pressure, etc. Cuma generalising it to something like “dahulu dan kini” tu kurang tepat bagi aku. Kiranya kalau ada orang nama Abu suka pakai selipar jepun pergi pasar, tak semestinya semua Abu acted that way. Paling leceh pun, kau tak mungkin tahu orang yang pakai selipar pergi pasar tu nama dia sebenarnya Abu.
Fallacy yang aku maksudkan tak semestinya satu keadaan ni saja. Probably assumed aku tiada hujah kukuh pun untuk nyatakan why is it such a fallacy to me, mungkin sebab aku rasa aku tak boleh terima similarities between two different situations. Takpun how easier it is for me to get pissed off the way bila ada orang cakap “wah muka kau sama macam kawan aku yada yada…” Tu baru mukadimah, lepas tu mesti orang akan tanya some similarities kononnya, before they try to compare something again.
Sometimes these differences are outright ignored by the person presenting the fallacy; other times, they may not be aware of the differences. The fallacy occurs, and is common because real-world parallels are always limited; the differences between things can often overpower their similarities. Analogies and metaphors can be very useful to explain things to people and often play an important part in learning. However, because of the prevalence of false analogies, they’re much less useful in making arguments. Oh, whatever it is we’re looking for in our life, is it enough untuk kita hanya berasa takut?