As I said, "an analogy like this" (emphasis now added).
The utility of an analogy is that it conveys a point in a more obvious way
The goal is that, but the goal and the means are different things. The means, to put it in a more informal way, is that "the same logic applies," which is the everyday way of saying "it has a the same (or similar) formal relation".
Rhetorically you can certainly convince people with an analogy of this kind that in virtually no way maintains the formal relation, but doing so is generally regarded as sophistry. As I explained already, the user's analogy is incoherent and we can imagine a more coherent analogy, but they have done no more of the work to produce that analogy than if they said "imagine we were talking about geological formations and you were preoccupied with a grain of sand," which discards the formal pretense that the real comment maintains.
And this is a forum post, not a spoken conversation, so it doesn't bear the same level of monolinearity and therefore I don't really give a shit if it's off topic.
Oh! I see what you're doing. You're insisting on a specific, unhelpful, and—ultimately—incorrect definition of a term as a meta-commentary on the weakened definition of racism as mere racial animosity as used by the privileged who think they know better than to listen to others, that are the subject of the post.
It's trolly as hell, but very clever, and a far, far better analogy. Bravo!
As I said, "an analogy like this" (emphasis now added).
The goal is that, but the goal and the means are different things. The means, to put it in a more informal way, is that "the same logic applies," which is the everyday way of saying "it has a the same (or similar) formal relation".
Rhetorically you can certainly convince people with an analogy of this kind that in virtually no way maintains the formal relation, but doing so is generally regarded as sophistry. As I explained already, the user's analogy is incoherent and we can imagine a more coherent analogy, but they have done no more of the work to produce that analogy than if they said "imagine we were talking about geological formations and you were preoccupied with a grain of sand," which discards the formal pretense that the real comment maintains.
And this is a forum post, not a spoken conversation, so it doesn't bear the same level of monolinearity and therefore I don't really give a shit if it's off topic.
Oh! I see what you're doing. You're insisting on a specific, unhelpful, and—ultimately—incorrect definition of a term as a meta-commentary on the weakened definition of racism as mere racial animosity as used by the privileged who think they know better than to listen to others, that are the subject of the post.
It's trolly as hell, but very clever, and a far, far better analogy. Bravo!