When using an example to try and support some point you are trying to make, is it better to use a common example that your audience is familiar with, or an exotic thought experiment?
The choice of an example in support of a philosophical position, or the choice of a counterexample to criticize a philosophical position, depends on the topic under investigation. If we were wondering whether two individuals could be physically identical but mentally different, for example, we might need to resort to the exotic twin earth examples found in the literature in the philosophy of mind. It is a good policy to avoid gratuitous exoticism, however, and instead use examples that involve familiar circumstances and contexts when possible. The reason for this is that in philosophical discussions the aim is to find as much common ground as possible. If examples used to ground a position are themselves controversial, then it will be more difficult to advance an argument based on them than if more familiar, accepted examples are invoked.