There are many logical fallacies, and over the next few weeks and months, I will occasionally focus on a fallacy. While fallacies are typically from the debating sphere and may seem out of place on a blog dedicated to writing, they do appear in writing as well. And not just in social media and blog comments either. They can appear in website and marketing copy, political speeches, opinion pieces, and so on.
Today’s fallacy is slippery slope.
What is the slippery slope fallacy?
When it comes to fallacies, a slippery slope is when a speaker, rather than countering or addressing the argument made by the other speaker, introduces extreme hypotheticals to the discussion. This tactic is often used when the speaker can’t address the argument raised by the opponent, so they try to deflect or distract, similar to the red herring and ad hominem fallacies.
Examples of the slippery slope fallacy
Here are some other examples of the slippery slope fallacy:
- If we allow gays couples to marry, then people will want to marry young children or their pets.
- I lock up my dog in a cage every day because if I don’t, it might end up outside, where he could get abducted and tortured.
- If you think the story of Noah is allegorical, then what’s next? Jesus? The Resurrection? Then you’ll end up a lost atheist, with no morals and spending the rest of your life in prison.
- If we let people choose when they die, how long until other people choose when they die? When will doctors (or the government) decide that you or I should die right now?
- My property taxes just went up! Communism!
In all the above examples, the speaker offers no proof that their hypotheticals will actually occur, let alone as a direct result of the situation they oppose. They leverage fear to appeal to the emotions of the audience, which in itself is another fallacy.
Avoiding the points someone else raises by responding to baseless hypotheticals is unfair to them, and it’s intellectually lazy for you. Hopefully, these examples explain the importance of focusing on an opponent’s actual claims.
Which logical fallacy should I cover next? Let me know in the comments below.
