Special Interest
May 30, 2020, 08:39:00 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  

Pages: 1 ... 147 148 149 150 151 152 [153]
  Print  
Author Topic: General butthurt & pc faggotry etc  (Read 566588 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yrjö-Koskinen
Heavy user
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 284


Hate globally, act peripherally


WWW
« Reply #2280 on: March 20, 2020, 11:16:16 PM »

Virtually every political and social change (violent revolutions included) has been begun with, often even fully accomplished through, a "slippery slope". The assertion that it is a logical fallacy makes no sense.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 11:26:21 PM by Yrjö-Koskinen » Logged

"Alkoholi ei ratkaise ongelmia, mutta eipä kyllä vittu maitokaan"

Ahvenanmaalla Puhutaan Suomea
deutscheasphalt
Heavy user
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348



WWW
« Reply #2281 on: March 20, 2020, 11:52:18 PM »

It is by definition a logical fallacy since the assumed consequence cannot be established in a logical argument.
However this other dude just used it as a buzzword to make himself look intelligent for something that doesn't contain a slippery slope argument at all.
Logged

Yrjö-Koskinen
Heavy user
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 284


Hate globally, act peripherally


WWW
« Reply #2282 on: March 21, 2020, 12:31:42 AM »

When people point out logical fallacies it is almost always an expression of hypocrisy, but many logical fallacies (straw man, ad hominem, even reductio ad hitlerum), can theoretically be avoided by all parties. You don't HAVE to call your leftie buddie a communist, you CAN argue all relevant points with a MAGA hat dude without bringing up Hitler. If you're discussing concrete political or social predictions, I'm not so sure you can avoid the slippery slope argument as comfortably. At least no-one ever does.

"Slippery slope" arguments can certainly be discarded as fallacies in philosophy class or Rhetoric 101, but how would you discuss the relationship between current decisions and events and the future without them? One of the more famous arguments against Trump from the Left is that he will, or at least wants to, create a White Supremacist 50's America, much like the boomer argument against Obama was that he would make America more Islamic (or something, I don't care about these things). These are indeed stupid arguments, but only because we know that Trump isn't much of a "white racist", and that Obama was a secular capitalist shill with a bit of Scandinavian polish on him. The arguments, however, are not "illogical" or "fallacious" in any politically meaningful sense, and we can well formulate adult and even rational alternatives to them. Say "If Trump Tweets and says that NATO and the US will not defend the Baltic states unless they pay their full NATO dues, this will strengthen the geopolitical position of Russia". This is clearly "slippery slope" stuff - perhaps Putin will resign and personally head up the next Moscow Pride Parade out of sheer gratitude simply because Trump said he wouldn't back up Estonia, who knows? It's still a potentially relevant argument in a political discussion on Trump's public statements, and must be refuted with something else than wikipedia references.

To put it simpler:
"If you shoot heroin ten times a week there's a real possibility you will become a heroin addict and live in a shoe."
"SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUMENT!"

Indeed it is - almost nothing in the realm of manifest reality and time follows logically from anything else - but the argument is still a very pertinent to the question of whether you should be shooting heroin regularly or not. Pure logic doesn't always interact well with reality, even if I agree that it is clearly the superior realm of those two.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2020, 12:41:10 AM by Yrjö-Koskinen » Logged

"Alkoholi ei ratkaise ongelmia, mutta eipä kyllä vittu maitokaan"

Ahvenanmaalla Puhutaan Suomea
deutscheasphalt
Heavy user
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348



WWW
« Reply #2283 on: March 21, 2020, 03:00:59 AM »

Sorry I don't wanna dissect this too much but I feel there's a lot mixed up in what you said.

"If you shoot heroin ten times a week there's a real possibility you will become a heroin addict and live in a shoe."
"SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUMENT!"
Not a great example for potential slippery slope. You could back that claim up with actual data to put a number to that "real" possibility. To me it's just a fancy sounding way of stating the invalidity of an argument whereas many people fail to present the actual flaw and just leave it with saying "SlIpPeRy SlOpE dUuDe".

- almost nothing in the realm of manifest reality and time follows logically from anything else -
that's why we have probabilistic logic

but the argument is still a very pertinent to the question of whether you should be shooting heroin regularly or not.
If you introduce a premise that leads the argument towards heroin addiction being bad within a deontic system sure. But I can just reject that premise and all your normative claims with it.

Logged

Yrjö-Koskinen
Heavy user
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 284


Hate globally, act peripherally


WWW
« Reply #2284 on: March 27, 2020, 11:09:40 PM »

Not a great example for potential slippery slope. You could back that claim up with actual data to put a number to that "real" possibility. To me it's just a fancy sounding way of stating the invalidity of an argument whereas many people fail to present the actual flaw and just leave it with saying "SlIpPeRy SlOpE dUuDe".
I used an exaggerated example to illustrate my claim, but the possibility of data and additional arguments was exactly what I was trying to get across. Lazy and useless slippery slope accusations are most commonly leveled against claims which can be supported/disproved by empirical information, or at least made more or less likely through additional arguments.

Statements such as "Cannabis is a gateway drug", "Accepting censorship of Nazis opens the possibility of censoring anyone opposing the status quo, and will increase censorship", "Advocating child rape may lead to an increase of actual child rape", etc may be true or untrue, but none of them can be discredited on their inherent structure alone. And leveling a charge of "slippery slope" in any real world argument is basically an attempt to pretend that they can. Once again: most political change take place through "slippery slope" processes. That is at least one of a few reasons why American public discourse is so preoccupied with Socialism, White Nationalism and Islamism, rather than any of the political currents that actually run American society.

If it was unclear, the heroin example included an unstated "deontic" context. It would be rather senseless to argue that multiple heroin injections are negative because of their addictive qualities in a discussion with, say, an addict who rejected the premise that heroin addiction is bad at all. Point taken, though.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 12:24:28 AM by Yrjö-Koskinen » Logged

"Alkoholi ei ratkaise ongelmia, mutta eipä kyllä vittu maitokaan"

Ahvenanmaalla Puhutaan Suomea
Pages: 1 ... 147 148 149 150 151 152 [153]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.106 seconds with 20 queries.