5 ms·
The slippery slope argument is a fallacy.
by jumelles 4y ago
The slippery slope argument is a fallacy.
- ch4s3 4y agoIt's only a logical fallacy in the form if p then q; if q then r if then ... so on until the end point you're arguing towards. To say that history informs us that a particular hill easily becomes slippery is not a logical fallacy.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoIt's a fallacy whenever someone argues from it. Like the GP, they are literally arguing from a SSF and no one believes that's what it is. Beyond the pale.
- ch4s3 4y agoTo quote the original comment: " I'm very concerned that the US government will set a precedent for regulating what apps citizens are allowed to use." Since US law is based on precedent, it is not unreasonable to say that allowing the government to legislate which apps are available to US persons could lead to creeping powers to regulate apps more broadly. All of post 9/11 security law is practically a national park of slippery slopes.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoI see the confusion. I was referring to "this feels like a slope that could become very slippery." having any meaning outside of someone arguing from SSF.
- ch4s3 4y agoYes, what I meant was this sort of creeping expansion of US government has historically created slippery slopes.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoExactly, that's definitionally fallistic.
- ch4s3 4y agoNo, it's an appeal to previous examples of the same thing happening.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoSlippery slope is the only fallacy where people can simultaneously use it by name, and still claim, "but this time it's true!"
- throwaway5947 4y agoYou also need to consider the slope and slipperiness of the status quo.