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 logical form of the slippery slope argument, referred to as the "arbitrary line" version, [8] argues that the acceptance of A will lead to the acceptance of A1, as A1 is not significantly different from A. A1 will then lead to A2, A2 to A3, and eventually the process will lead to the unacceptable B. [6] As Glover argues, this version ...
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. [46]
Slippery slope arguments may be defeated by asking critical questions or giving counterarguments. [33] 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. [34]
Non-voluntary euthanasia is cited as one of the possible outcomes of the slippery slope argument against euthanasia, in which it is claimed that permitting voluntary euthanasia to occur will lead to the support and legalization of non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia, [11] although other ethicists have contested this idea. [12] [13] [14]
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 ...
Examples include the very tiny handle on maple syrup bottles, faux buckles on shoes, the floppy disk 'save' icon, or the sound of a shutter on a cell phone camera. Image credits: Festina_lente123 #12
Color gradient illustrating a sorites paradox, any adjacent colors being indistinguishable by the human eye. There are many variations of the sorites paradox, some of which allow consideration of the difference between "being" and "seeming", that is, between a question of fact and a question of perception; [2] this may be seen to be relevant when the argument hinges on each change being ...