Can you give an example from your previous classes where an instructor has used an anthropomorphism to describe a nonhuman thing? What were/are the trade-offs of the description (i.e. why did the description work and what were its limitations)?
In a high school biology class, my teacher was describing competitive inhibition of enzyme active sites. She said that the substrate wants to bind to the active site, however the inhibitor is already occupying the active site, preventing the substrate from binding. This example was beneficial to creating a rudimentary understanding of the relationship between the enzyme, substrate, and competitive inhibitor. However, its limitation was that it creates the false understanding that the substrate actively wants to bind to the substrate. In reality it does not actively seek out the enzyme. It is more accurate to say that the substrate comes into contact with the enzyme active sight and binds when in the proper proximity and orientation to fit the active sight. The likelihood of enzyme and substrate binding depends upon the enzyme and substrate concentrations and does not depend upon substrate actively seeking out the enzyme like suggested in the anthropomorphism above.