Abstract: | The paper addresses so-called slippery slope arguments, which are usually used
as warnings against accepting a certain view or undertaking some action for the
reason of their negative consequences. Two types of this kind of arguments might be
recognised, which differ significantly: logical and empirical one. Logical slippery
slopes are rarely well supported. Most common flaw they contain is so-called fallacy
of assimilation. Empirical slippery slopes, on the other hand, are definitely much
more powerful kind of argument. Their soundness depends on the truth of premise
according to which decision A1 will finally lead to unwanted outcome An. Yet, the assessment
of this premise, and in consequence of the entire argument, often demands
specialist knowledge in the field. |