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 ...
Slippery slope (thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose) – asserting that a proposed, relatively small, first action will inevitably lead to a chain of related events resulting in a significant and negative event and, therefore, should not be permitted.
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]
Slippery slope arguments argue against a certain proposal based on the fact that this proposal would bring with it a causal chain of events eventually leading to a bad outcome. [ 4 ] [ 9 ] But even if every step in this chain is relatively probable, probabilistic calculus may still reveal that the likelihood of all steps occurring together is ...
The form of the post hoc fallacy is expressed as follows: . A occurred, then B occurred.; Therefore, A caused B. When B is undesirable, this pattern is often combined with the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent, assuming the logical inverse holds: believing that avoiding A will prevent B.
The Metro-North attack is a perfect example, Mangual said. ... Such a lack of enforcement of such basic “social norms” as being polite on the subway is a slippery slope to a dangerous city ...
A set of 100 randomly generated points displayed on a scatter graph. Examining the points, it is easy to identify apparent patterns. In particular, rather than spreading out evenly, it is not uncommon for random data points to form clusters, giving the (false) impression of "hot spots" created by some underlying cause.
An example could be the rise of gas prices, the company would only raise the price by a few cents every day, instead of a large change to a target price overnight. More people would notice and dispute a dramatic, 10% increase overnight, while a 10% increase over a span of a week would less likely be even noticed, let alone argued.