tuyv Analogy
Applies analogical reasoning to any problem. Diagnoses what kind of analogy work is needed and applies the right tool.
Which tool fits
| You need to... | Tool |
|---|---|
| Find where an existing analogy or metaphor breaks down | boundary-testing |
| Import solutions from a completely different domain | domain-transfer |
| Approach a problem through a different field's lens | perspective-shifting |
| Test the structural correspondence between two situations | structure-mapping |
Routing Decision
- Already using an analogy and want to stress-test it → boundary-testing
- Stuck on a problem, want to find who's solved something like it elsewhere → domain-transfer
- Need fresh eyes from an expert in a different field → perspective-shifting
- Want to know if two situations are genuinely structurally similar → structure-mapping
- Unclear → structure-mapping first (establishing the analogy rigorously), then boundary-testing (finding where it fails)
Framing check: Confirm the specific analogy situation before routing. State what you've identified — the analogy or problem being examined and the goal (stress-test, import solutions, shift perspective, or validate structure) — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the analogy situation and goal]. 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 situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Confirm Direction
After diagnosing which tool fits, use the AskUserQuestion tool to confirm direction. Construct the question dynamically to include your diagnosis:
- Question: "My read: [diagnosed tool] — [one sentence on why it fits]. How would you like to proceed?"
- Header: "Direction"
- Options:
- Yes, run that tool — Execute the diagnosed skill immediately using the context already provided
- Show all options — List every skill in this category with one-line descriptions
- Quick version — Run a lighter-weight alternative if one exists for this situation
- Re-diagnose — Revisit the situation description for a different read
Proceed based on their selection.
Boundary Testing
Finds where an analogy breaks down before it's relied upon.
Name the analogy explicitly: A is like B because [shared properties]. Now systematically test each dimension of the comparison. For each shared property: does it actually hold? What differences exist? Find the dimension where the analogy fails in a way that matters for the decision at hand. Analogies fail silently — the damage happens when decisions are made on a mapping that doesn't hold in the relevant dimension.
Output: Analogy map (what holds, what doesn't), the specific dimension of failure, and what decisions should not rely on this analogy.
Domain Transfer
Imports solutions from unrelated domains by finding structural similarities.
Name the core structure of the problem: what kind of challenge is this underneath the surface details? Search for domains that have solved structurally similar problems — often in completely unrelated fields (biology for network design, military strategy for resource constraints, jazz for improvisational systems). For each candidate domain: what was the solution? How does it map back?
Output: Core problem structure, candidate domains with solved analogues, and specific solutions mapped back to the original problem.
Perspective Shifting
Approaches a problem through a completely different field's lens.
Name the home domain — the expertise lens being applied by default. Now select 2-3 radically different fields: what would a [biologist / game designer / urban planner / etc.] see when looking at this? Apply each lens genuinely, not superficially. The goal is to surface assumptions invisible from inside the home domain.
Output: Per-lens analysis — what each field notices, what assumptions it challenges, what solutions it suggests that the home domain wouldn't.
Structure Mapping
Identifies the deep structural correspondence between two situations.
List the elements of situation A. List the elements of situation B. For each element in A: does a corresponding element exist in B? Are the relationships between elements preserved? Test whether the mapping is genuine isomorphism or just surface similarity. Surface similarity fails on deeper structure; genuine isomorphism predicts behavior accurately.
Output: Element-by-element correspondence table, relationship preservation check, verdict on whether the analogy is structurally valid, and what the mapping predicts.