4 ms·

What about the last decade would lead you to believe the slippery slope is a fallacy? It's less a slope than a cliff.

BowBun 4y ago
People love to reference the logical fallacy[1] as though there have been no instances where momentum builds from a series of decisions and cascades in a massive shift. But then again, thinkers like these are happy to comfortably think about the past while many suffer, instead of applying realism towards the future. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  People love to cite the fallacy because it’s one that’s used a lot. Sure, momentum builds. Sometimes. But the fallacy is proclaiming with 100% certainty both that the momentum will build, and the specific way it’s going to roll. We don’t know the future. We can’t claim with certainty that something will happen as a result of another action. Claiming anything otherwise is falling right into the fallacy.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    Drawing a downward slope is a fallacy when you have a single datapoint and you're just asserting that the datapoint exists as part of a trend. If you have more than a single datapoint, then claiming to see a trend is no longer fallacious. In the real world, there is rarely a single datapoint. In the case of religions demanding censorship, there is A LOT of data.
    - mynameisvlad 4y ago
      The real world is not a math formula. A trend can just as quickly plateau, spike, or plummet. That's the point, that none of us can predict the next step, regardless how much we think we can. The fallacy is proclaiming that a specific chain of events will occur due to one action. Can it happen? Sure. Will it happen with 100% certainty? Of course not, so don't pretend like it will, regardless how many datapoints exist.
      - LarryMullins 4y ago
        When you draw a trend line that goes up: Yass science is awesome, progress is inevitable! When you draw a trend line that goes down: Um sweety, that's a heckin fallacy. > The fallacy is proclaiming that a specific chain of events will occur due to one action. As I said myself and you rejected, the fallacy is asserting a trend from a single data point. I guess you just like hearing it in your own words more.
        mynameisvlad 4y ago
        I mean, that’s just straight up not the definition of the fallacy, so I guess if you can redefine it to whatever you like, then sure, you’re definitely right.
  - BowBun 4y ago
    I don't think most people that use it in casual conversation (which isn't logically sound to begin with) are using it in good faith. In my experience, it's used to shut down concerns that people have based on previous experiences or history. It's also usually served with a "Gotcha!" attitude, as if the listener has found some golden ticket to shut down conversation.

People love to reference the logical fallacy[1] as though there have been no instances where momentum builds from a series of decisions and cascades in a massive shift. But then again, thinkers like these are happy to comfortably think about the past while many suffer, instead of applying realism towards the future. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

mynameisvlad 4y ago
People love to cite the fallacy because it’s one that’s used a lot. Sure, momentum builds. Sometimes. But the fallacy is proclaiming with 100% certainty both that the momentum will build, and the specific way it’s going to roll. We don’t know the future. We can’t claim with certainty that something will happen as a result of another action. Claiming anything otherwise is falling right into the fallacy.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  Drawing a downward slope is a fallacy when you have a single datapoint and you're just asserting that the datapoint exists as part of a trend. If you have more than a single datapoint, then claiming to see a trend is no longer fallacious. In the real world, there is rarely a single datapoint. In the case of religions demanding censorship, there is A LOT of data.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    The real world is not a math formula. A trend can just as quickly plateau, spike, or plummet. That's the point, that none of us can predict the next step, regardless how much we think we can. The fallacy is proclaiming that a specific chain of events will occur due to one action. Can it happen? Sure. Will it happen with 100% certainty? Of course not, so don't pretend like it will, regardless how many datapoints exist.
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      When you draw a trend line that goes up: Yass science is awesome, progress is inevitable! When you draw a trend line that goes down: Um sweety, that's a heckin fallacy. > The fallacy is proclaiming that a specific chain of events will occur due to one action. As I said myself and you rejected, the fallacy is asserting a trend from a single data point. I guess you just like hearing it in your own words more.
      - mynameisvlad 4y ago
        I mean, that’s just straight up not the definition of the fallacy, so I guess if you can redefine it to whatever you like, then sure, you’re definitely right.
- BowBun 4y ago
  I don't think most people that use it in casual conversation (which isn't logically sound to begin with) are using it in good faith. In my experience, it's used to shut down concerns that people have based on previous experiences or history. It's also usually served with a "Gotcha!" attitude, as if the listener has found some golden ticket to shut down conversation.