Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. [1] The core of the slippery slope argument is that a specific decision under debate is likely to result in unintended consequences. The strength of such an argument ...
The second primary form of the slippery slope argument is that of the "Empirical" or "Psychological" argument. [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 8 ] The empirical version does not rely on a logical connection between A and B, but instead argues that an acceptance of A will, in time, lead to an acceptance of B. [ 4 ] The process is not a logical necessity, but one ...
Slippery slope arguments may be defeated by asking critical questions or giving counterarguments. [32] There are several reasons for a slippery slope to be fallacious: for example, the argument is going too far into the future, it is a too complex argument whose structure is hard to identify, or the argument makes emotional appeals. [33]
The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute. [19] Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so phenomenal or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency. [20]
The “slippery slope” refrain was a common one in the Senate hearing Wednesday. “My fear that we start with tight parameters and then down the road, we're just like Canada labeled as worse ...
But it can also make sense of arguments independent of an audience, unlike the dialogical approach. [9] This perspective is well suited for explaining why some slippery slope arguments constitute fallacies but others not. Slippery slope arguments argue against a certain proposal based on the fact that this proposal would bring with it a causal ...
Politicians capitulated without a fight because they thought they needed to look tough on immigration, but this is the beginning of a slippery slope with no end.
If euthanasia is strictly controlled, we can avoid entering a slippery slope and prevent patients from seeking alternative methods which may not be legal. [1] Arguments against include: It can lead to a slippery slope; if we allow patients this right, it can expand and have dire consequences.