ABOUT BOOK

Analogical arguments are ubiquitous vehicles of knowledge transfer in science and medicine. This paper outlines a Bayesian evidence-amalgamation framework for the purpose of formally exploring different analogy-based inference patterns with respect to their justification in pharmacological risk assessment. By relating formal explications of similarity, analogy, and analog simulation, three sources of confirmatory support for a causal hypothesis are distinguished in reconstruction: relevant studies, established causal knowledge, and computational models.