> I'd be happy to burn most of that kind of material, most of us here would also be eager book burners of that first wave also. That's partly why Bradbury's boo

> I'd be happy to burn most of that kind of material, most of us here would also be eager book burners of that first wave also. That's partly why Bradbury's book is True and powerful. It's a great cautionary tale, but also a slippery slope fallacy: https://www.thoughtco.com/slippery-slope-logical-fallacy-1692105 https://www.thoughtco.com/slippery-slope-logical-fallacy-169... > Indeed, given the endless parade of imagined horribles one could conjure up for any policy decision, the slippery slope can easily become an argument for doing nothing at all. Yet act we do; as George Will once noted, 'All politics takes place on a slippery slope.' > The slippery slope fallacy is committed only when we accept without further justification or argument that once the first step is taken, the others are going to follow, or that whatever would justify the first step would, in fact, justify the rest. Because with each new book or set of books to be burned a decision has to be made that is similar to, but ultimately independent of the prior decisions. There is nothing stopping us from burning more books, just as there is nothing stopping us from not burning more books. The momentum is a factor, but it is not insurmountable, just like it's possible to moderate almost any behavior without resorting to either abstinence or addiction. Point taken though that every addiction starts with breaking abstinence.