Metaphorical argumentation is a common argumentation method in argumentative writing.

The primary argumentation method of argumentative writing is rational analysis, that is, starting from established postulates (axioms), known facts, theorems or definitions, reasoning and drawing conclusions.

For example, if we are sure that we can draw a circle with any point as the center and any length as the radius (the third of the five axioms of Euclid geometry), then we can infer that the distance from any point on the circle to the center is equal. If the distance from the center of another circle outside the circle to the center is exactly equal to the sum of the radii of the two circles, then the two circles must have only one common point.

The conclusion drawn through rational reasoning is self-sufficient and self-consistent, absolutely reliable and absolutely effective under preset conditions. This argument method is the basis of argumentative writing.

In the field of humanities, rational reasoning and argumentation are also fundamental argumentation methods.

For example, "the weather is not as good as the geographical position, and the geographical position is not as good as people." The city of three miles, the country of seven miles, was invincible when attacked by the Lord of the Rings. If the husband attacks it, it will be the right time, and if it is invincible, it will be the right place. The city is not too high, the pool is not too deep, the army is not very profitable, and the rice is not too much. It is not as good as peace. "

This argument presupposes that there are three factors that determine the outcome of a war, namely, time, place and human harmony. Then compare them one by one in reasoning, and finally draw the conclusion that human harmony is the most important factor to determine the outcome of the war. Under the author's preset conditions, this conclusion is absolutely true without exception. Presupposition and conclusion are self-consistent and complete, and there is a clear causal relationship between them without any contradiction. If someone wants to refute it, it can only show that the author's presupposition is false, for example, adding a fourth decisive factor to win or lose the war, and then re-establishing the theory.

However, rational reasoning is very difficult to understand and has high requirements for both authors and readers. Therefore, in order to make reasoning more vivid and approachable, the author sometimes uses metaphors to demonstrate. Therefore, metaphorical argument is first of all a writing technique that visualizes and makes life-oriented views.

For example, "writing articles, giving speeches, writing books and writing reports, the first is freshmen, two, three, four, three, four, ugly children, big abcd, small ABCD, Arabic numerals, a lot!" Fortunately, the ancients and foreigners made many symbols for us, which made it easy for us to open a Chinese medicine shop. An article is full of these symbols. It does not ask questions, analyze problems, solve problems, and express approval or opposition. Still a Chinese medicine shop, there is no substance. "

Mao Zedong's metaphor for Chinese medicine shops is not to demonstrate anything, but to show the core features of some articles, which makes people feel vivid. If someone says that this article only criticizes a certain kind of composition by criticizing Chinese medicine shops, it is logically untenable, and the two are just the same. Then this person belongs to "wrangling" because the purpose of metaphorical argument is not here.

Metaphorical argument is to make argumentative writing vivid, which is not necessarily the first choice for reasoning, but this does not mean that metaphorical argument is not an effective proof method.

Dialectics holds that things are generally related, and there is no absolute isolation and absolute self-improvement. As a method of proof, the establishment of figurative argument mainly depends not on rationality, but on the author's keen intuition about the universal connection of things. That is, the author realizes that there are often magical similarities between different categories of things. If we can grasp this similarity, we can be suddenly enlightened and understand the essence of things like a monk. Metaphor argument skips the tedious reasoning process and directly grasps the root cause through intuitive understanding of the essence of things.

For example, "fish, I want it; Bear's paw is what I want You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't have your cake and eat it. Life is what I want; Righteousness is also what I want. You can't have both, and those who give up their lives are also righteous. "

Many people on the Internet criticized Mencius' argument, saying that it has no logic at all, and the viewpoint is established only by a metaphor. And from this, it is an attack on the whole discourse system of ancient Chinese. However, this kind of attack is precisely the performance that philosophy has not learned. It is rationalism to limit the way human beings know the world and acquire knowledge within rational circles.

In fact, Mencius' argument is to use fish and bear's paw to compare the relationship between life and morality. I want both, but if I can't have both, I want the better one. Coupled with sonorous sentence patterns and rhythms, we skip all rational deduction, do not rely on analysis, but rely on the appeal of language itself, pointing directly at people's hearts.

If the demonstration process is compared to landing on the moon, then rational analysis is the solid development of science, and finally human beings landed on the moon with the help of rockets and lunar modules. Every step is down-to-earth, clear and clear, and even if it fails, the reasons for the failure can be analyzed. Once the moon landing is successful, its great joy and happiness are beyond words.

The metaphor is looking up at the night sky from the earth. Skipped the long process of scientific and technological development and faced the bright moon directly at the seemingly shallowest phenomenon level. Although this can't be compared with the real moon landing, people's happiness has not been damaged at all. Even, we can ask the opposite question: Do you really understand the significance of landing on the moon? Is the moon just a goal to conquer for you? A box of moon soil or a moonlit poem, which is what human beings should strive for?

In addition, metaphor argument can further integrate the structure of the article, and a metaphor can build the whole world and show the author's ability to conceive.

The biography of planting trees and camels is such an article.

This paper first puts forward a metaphorical point of view to explain why camel Guo Can planted good trees: "Camel Guo Can not only allows trees to survive and multiply, but also conforms to the nature of trees, so that its nature is bad."

The following mainly expounds the specific content of "following trees with the sun", and highlights the correct tree planting method by comparing the practice of "separating wood from others".

So far, the idea is going well, but it hasn't come to the point yet. So a problem appeared. Most of the articles went, but they were all discussed at the metaphorical level. Is this necessary?

Through a transition, the following leads to the topic-the art of governing the people. At this time, we should pay attention to a problem, that is, after the article gets to the point, the author does not seem to show a positive view. What should we do to govern the people? It is wrong for Liu Zongyuan to only say that "long people are tired of their orders". What is the correct way to criticize? number

However, if we look at the context together, we suddenly realize that the author has already made arrangements on it. There were positive practices before the transformation, but they didn't hit the point. There is a topic after the transition, but there is no positive point of view. The combination of the two complements each other and forms a complete self-question.

"Species" is to use the similarity between metaphor ontology and metaphor to connect two unrelated things, planting trees and governing the people, answer questions invisibly in the second half, and reveal topics that were not mentioned in the first half in the second half.