4 ms·

Extend your logic a bit. How long until you argue to apply it to hardware inside a human?

• fzeroracer 8y ago
  Slippery slope is a fallacy for a reason. By your argument anything that takes away any control ever is a bad thing and could lead to thought crime.
  • jakeogh 8y ago
    As if steps in some direction are always just fine. Incrementalism (aka "the slippery slope") is the most common route to totalitarianism. How convenient for the centralization of power to label the obvious as a "fallacy". Your sentence makes little sense btw, your orig arg is for prior restraint, which history has rightly tossed in the failed ideologies bin over and over.
    • fzeroracer 8y ago
      There is no 'centralization of power' labeling slippery slope as a fallacy. It's a fallacy because it's a non-argument, it can be applied to anywhere at any time and does nothing to actually prove your point. You're essentially arguing for the status quo, that nothing should ever change because otherwise you immediately slide down a slippery slope.
      • jakeogh 8y ago
        "that nothing should ever change because otherwise you immediately slide down a slippery slope." Incorrect. I am explicitly arguing that restrictions are imposed incrementally. People are not going ignore a obvious direction (more rules not less). Purporting to have caught someone in a logical contradiction because they can use a compass is ignoring the fact that rules are countable. You are for prior restraint here, why not implement it in future body mods? Prior restraint _is_ to centralize power.