Question

Write a precise description of the analogy at the heart of Safety Could Pay for Weapons Makers, followed by a brief evaluation. Does the analogy make sense to you? Do you find it persuasive? Why or why not?

Answer 1

The analogy at the heart of Safety Could Pay for Weapons Makers is persuasive and makes sense.

Step-by-step explanation:

The analogy at the heart of Safety Could Pay for Weapons Makers is comparing the safety precautions taken by weapons makers to the insurance industry. The author suggests that weapons makers can minimize legal risks and financial damages by investing in safety measures, similar to how insurance companies minimize risks and pay out claims when accidents occur.

I find this analogy to be persuasive because it helps to illustrate the benefits of prioritizing safety. By comparing it to an industry that is well-known for risk management, the author highlights the potential positive outcomes of investing in safety measures for weapons makers.

The analogy also makes sense because both industries, weapons manufacturing and insurance, deal with potential risks and their mitigation. By equating the two, the author is able to convey the idea that safety measures are not only morally responsible, but also economically beneficial for weapons makers.