When I met the woman who would become my wife, I knew nothing of biology. She wasn’t a biologist but was far more knowledgeable on the subject than I. (Side note: this is still true.)
She told me that fruit is an “interkingdom, interspecies orgy” since it involved multiple partners and participants of both flora and fauna varieties.
Fascinated by that, I posted the message on my Facebook (it was a long time ago and I didn’t know they were evil). Suddenly, all my friends thought I was weird.
“Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.” -Terence McKenna
How can you just assert that seeds are not anologous to sperm? You don’t get to dismiss someone else’s apology because your perspective has less layers of abstraction and is therefore more accurate.
The entire concept of analogy requires abstraction. Any analogy can be torn down by pointing out some inaccuracy in the comparison. If there weren’t any inaccuracies then it would be two thing anologous to each other it would just be two examples of one thing.
Sperm is absolutely anologous to seeds. That’s why we call it sperm.
…from Late Latin sperma “seed, semen,” from Greek sperma “the seed of plants, also of animals,” literally “that which is sown,” from speirein “to sow, scatter” (from PIE *sper-mn-, from root *sper- “to spread, to sow,”…
And then there’s also literal ginkgo tree sperm
You’re confusing the metaphorical sort of “analogous” with the term “analogous” used in evolutionary biology.
