Difference between revisions of "Slippery slope"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Overview: guilt by association) |
(→Examples: links: 2 volokh articles) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
** "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." — Senator [[Rick Santorum]] | ** "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." — Senator [[Rick Santorum]] | ||
** "Once you cross that Rubicon, then there's no place to stop. Because if a judge can say two men and two women can marry, there is no reason on Earth why some judge some place is not going to say, this is not fair. Three women or three men, or five and two or five and five." — [[James Dobson]] | ** "Once you cross that Rubicon, then there's no place to stop. Because if a judge can say two men and two women can marry, there is no reason on Earth why some judge some place is not going to say, this is not fair. Three women or three men, or five and two or five and five." — [[James Dobson]] | ||
| + | ==Links== | ||
| + | * '''2003-03/04''' [http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/March-April-2003/scene_marapr03_volokh.msp In Defense of the Slippery Slope] by Eugene Volokh & David Newman: "Despite the metaphor's poor reputation, a good decision now can lead to a bad one later." | ||
| + | * '''2002-09-16''' [http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/slippery.htm The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope] by Eugene Volokh | ||
Revision as of 21:08, 20 August 2006
Overview
"The slippery slope" is an argument that one event or decision will unleash a chain of other events or decisions leading ultimately to a highly undesirable outcome. Although it can be used in a logically valid way, in many cases it is based upon an assumed overestimate of the likelihood that each event in the series will cause the next one; in such cases, it is merely a form of guilt by association, which is a logical fallacy.
Logically valid usage of a slippery slope would need to either describe each step from the initial event to the final, clearly undesirable event, or else describe a process by which the initial event leads to the final event.
Reference
Examples
- from Slippery Slop, Slate magazine, 2004-05-19:
- "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." — Senator Rick Santorum
- "Once you cross that Rubicon, then there's no place to stop. Because if a judge can say two men and two women can marry, there is no reason on Earth why some judge some place is not going to say, this is not fair. Three women or three men, or five and two or five and five." — James Dobson
Links
- 2003-03/04 In Defense of the Slippery Slope by Eugene Volokh & David Newman: "Despite the metaphor's poor reputation, a good decision now can lead to a bad one later."
- 2002-09-16 The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope by Eugene Volokh