A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone claims that a position or decision will lead to a series of unintended negative consequences. These negative consequences are often bad and/or increasingly outlandish. The person using the slippery slope fallacy takes these consequences as a certainty and does not analyze the logic of their own position. A slippery slope fallacy can be used as a deflection to avoid discussing the merits of a position, shifting the field of debate.
Often, a slippery slope fallacy is used in conjunction with an appeal to fear.
In our comic below, you’ll see how a slippery slope fallacy can be used to muddy the waters around a policy proposal.
For a screen reader compatible slideshow version of the comic, please click through the below images:
Imagine if one of our characters were to directly engage with the Monocled Gentleman’s slippery slope fallacy. He implies that, if given the right to vote, women might try to elect a pony as president. A ridiculous statement like that can be used as bait. Suddenly, a person who was originally arguing that women should have the right to vote might find themselves arguing that no, women would not vote ponies into office. All of this sounds very silly, but it illustrates how a slippery slope fallacy can be used to shift the field of debate.
Of course, this is not to say that potential consequences of a decision should not be evaluated during a discussion. But these potentialities need to each be evaluated for their own logical soundness, and they should not be used to avoid engaging with the initial argument. A chain of events based on solid reasoning will help you avoid falling down the slippery slope.