Scientists are used to blame analogies as a non-scientific way of reasoning, though analogy lies in the very foundation of science, which has been clear ever since Hegel's Science of Logic. V. I. Lenin even wrote that all the achievements of natural sciences should be attributed to analogy. However, Hegel distinguished two kinds of analogy, depending on whether the essential or superficial properties of things are compared; in the following, only analytical analogies were considered as "truly scientific", while "superficial" analogies were contemptuously dismissed. Since most analogies in the arts appear to be "superficial" in that categorization, art was thought of as a second-rate occupation incapable of providing true knowledge of the world and only fit to entertain. In Unism, the balance between science and art gets restored, since the two kinds of analogy are treated as complementary aspects of the integral view of the world, and neither of them can exist without its opposite. A closer examination of Hegel's treatment of the issue shows that the two levels of analogy he described should better be called "associative" and "inductive", and they may equally be either sound or superficial, depending on the current cultural context, rather than their logical function.