Analogical Reasoning as a Tool of Epidemiological Investigation

Abstract

Few, if any, scientific inquiries are conducted against a background of complete knowledge, a background in which inquirers are in possession of the 'full facts' that relate to a particular question or issue. More often than not, scientists are compelled to conduct their deliberations in contexts of epistemic uncertainty, in which partial knowledge or even a total absence of knowledge characterise inquiry. Nowhere is this epistemic uncertainty more evident, or indeed more successfully controlled, than in the branch of scientific inquiry called epidemiology. In this paper, I examine how epidemiologists overcome the unique challenges to inquiry that are posed by epistemic uncertainty. In specific terms, I contend that epidemiologists employ analogical reasoning strategies in an attempt to advance their inquiries in situations that are epistemically uncertain. The context for my claims will be the early inquiries that were conducted into the emergence of HIV/AIDS in the United States. I argue that early scientific work in relation to HIV/AIDS was directly premised upon epidemiological investigations in which analogical reasoning with hepatitis B had featured significantly. I conclude that epidemiological investigations of AIDS exemplify the capacity of analogical reasoning to advance inquiry under conditions of epistemic uncertainty. To this extent, analogical reasoning should be a concern both to those who address practical problems of uncertainty management and to those who pursue theoretical debates within argumentation studies and epistemology.

Scaring the Public: Fear Appeal Arguments in Public Health Reasoning

“…This is in spite of the fact that many of the arguments that are the basis of this advice (e.g., argument from consequences) are vibrant areas of study within informal logic. In other publications, several of these arguments, including analogical argument, question-begging argument and the argument from ignorance, have been examined in public health contexts (Cummings, 2002(Cummings, , 2004(Cummings, , 2005(Cummings, , 2009(Cummings, , 2010(Cummings, , 2011. In this paper, a further argument, or rather group of arguments, which has been extensively investigated in informal logic, will also be examined in a public health context.…”

Reasoning and Public Health: New Ways of Coping with Uncertainty

“…There really is only one source for this work and that is the author's publications: Cummings (2002Cummings ( , 2004Cummings ( , 2005Cummings ( , 2009Cummings ( , 2010Cummings ( , 2011Cummings ( , 2012aCummings ( , b, c, 2013aCummings ( , b, 2014aCummings ( , b, c, d, e, 2015. Much of that work has been conducted in relation to the BSE epidemic in the UK.…”

The Use of 'No Evidence' Statements in Public Health

“…Alongside the argument from ignorance, several of these non-deductive practices have now been examined in a public health context. This includes fear appeal argument, analogical argument, circular argument and the appeal to authority (Cummings 2004(Cummings , 2010a(Cummings , 2012a(Cummings , 2012b(Cummings , 2012c(Cummings , 2013a(Cummings , 2013b. Of course, each of these practices would be found wanting if they were assessed by a deductive logical standard.…”