s4h-analogy-structure-mapping

Analogy Structure Mapping

Analogies are persuasive but often wrong. The surface similarity that makes a comparison feel apt can obscure structural differences that make it invalid. This skill maps the deep structure of both situations and checks correspondence element by element — distinguishing genuine isomorphism (same structure, different content) from superficial similarity (same surface, different structure).

---

Your Process

Step 1: State the Two Situations Write Situation A and Situation B clearly. State the analogy as claimed: "A is like B because..."

Framing check: Confirm the specific analogy before continuing. State what you've identified — the two situations being compared and the analogical claim linking them — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:

• Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the two situations and the claimed analogy]. Is that right?"
• Header: "Framing"
• Options:
  • Yes — proceed — framing is correct
  • Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
  • Reframe — different situations or analogy than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding

Step 2: Extract Structure of Each For each situation independently, map: key actors, their relationships, the dynamics (what drives change), the constraints (what limits action), and the goals (what success looks like). Do this for each situation before comparing — comparison before extraction introduces bias.

Step 3: Map Elements A to B For each structural element in A, identify the corresponding element in B. State the mapping explicitly: "In A, X plays the role of Y in B."

Step 4: Classify Each Mapped Pair For each mapped pair: is the correspondence genuine (same structural role, same relationship type, same dynamics) or superficial (same label or surface feature, different structural role)?

Step 5: Find Where the Mapping Breaks Every analogy breaks somewhere — this is not a failure, it is where the analysis becomes useful. Which differences are structurally significant? Which make the analogy unreliable for the specific prediction or decision being made?