What constitutes a false analogy in an argument from analogy?

A false analogy occurs when an argument relies on an analogy that is misleading due to insufficient similarity between the two subjects being compared. The key factor here is that the relevant aspects in which the two issues differ must significantly undermine the validity of the comparison being drawn.

When the two issues in an analogy are not similar enough in the pertinent aspects that are crucial to the argument, any conclusions drawn based on that analogy may lead to faulty reasoning. This means that while there may be surface-level similarities, the dissimilarities in critical features make the argument unconvincing and flawed.

In this context, the other options do not accurately describe the nature of a false analogy. The similarity of the two issues (as suggested in the first choice) would not constitute a false analogy, and an analogy that is objectively valid or has sufficient evidence for both issues (as per the last two options) typically represents a strong argument rather than a false one. Therefore, the identification of insufficient similarity in relevant aspects effectively captures the essence of what makes an analogy false in argumentative contexts.