Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Slippery slope arguments cannot be automatically dismissed as fallacious
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Slippery slope arguments structurally presuppose causal inevitability between steps, but empirical contingency means no such necessity can be established a priori.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Without a demonstrated mechanism linking each step, the argument form licenses any prohibition by speculative extrapolation, rendering it epistemically vacuous.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Walton's own pragma-dialectical framework shows slippery slope arguments are only non-fallacious when the causal chain is independently verifiable, not merely plausible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
In the absence of such verification, accepting the argument conflates rhetorical persuasiveness with logical validity, a distinction Hamblin's 'Fallacies' (1970) treats as foundational.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
If it is true that some action will precipitate a chain of consequences leading down an alleged slippery slope, this is a good reason to question that action
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
An argument that accurately identifies such a causal chain has genuine evidential force
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42