| name | s4h-analogy-boundary-testing |
| description | Finds where an analogy breaks down before it's relied upon. Analogies fail silently — the damage happens when decisions are made on a mapping that doesn't hold in the relevant dimension. Triggers: 'stress-test this analogy', 'where does this comparison break', 'does this really apply', 'test the metaphor', 'where is the analogy wrong'. |
Analogy Boundary Testing
Analogies are tools, not truths. The danger is not using an analogy — it is using one past
its boundary. Analogies fail silently: the flaw is invisible until a decision has been made
that depended on the part that didn't hold. This skill finds the boundary before that
happens.
Your Process
Step 1: State the Analogy
Write it explicitly: "X is like Y." Name the analogy being tested, the domain it comes
from, and the claim being made on the basis of it.
Framing check: Confirm the specific analogy before continuing. State what you've identified — the source domain, target domain, and the claim being made — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the analogy and the claim it supports]. 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 analogy or claim than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Step 2: List Similarities
What does the analogy capture correctly? List every genuine parallel — the aspects where
the structural correspondence is real. This is not validation; it's establishing what the
analogy is good for before finding what it isn't.
Step 3: List Differences
Every meaningful divergence between X and Y is a potential failure point. List them
systematically: different actors, different dynamics, different constraints, different
feedback mechanisms, different scales, different reversibility. Be thorough — incomplete
difference-listing is the most common failure mode here.
