Slippery Slope

Slippery Slope

Introduction

A Slippery Slope is known as the “edge” or sometimes the thin end of the wedge in US English, it is also known as the camel's nose. It is arguably an informal fallacy, a classic form of argument. A slippery slope argument states that a small first step can lead to a series of allied events culminating in some important result, it is just like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom. Such argument strength depends on the warrant, this means that a person can or can not represents a process that can direct towards the path of important effects (Rizzo et.al, 2003). The misleading understanding of slippery slope is generally use similarly in the same terms with the continuum misleading notion, in this it disregard the chances of a middle place and considers a gradual and conscious transition from one category to another. The latest applicability ignores and avoids the misleading aspects by considering the chances of this middle place.

Discussion

Description

The discussion on the subject takes various forms and directions and with respect to the classical style, it is argued that if any move is made in any given direction that would definitely starts things to move down on a path “slippery path”. Once the thing has started down the path slope metaphorically it will be moving down the slope continuously in the same path. The person who is arguing might see the things going in a negative direction and hence consider the metaphor of sliding downwards.

In the modern application of the term, there is a valid and logical form which suggests that a small change might have an impact that can result in a chain of long logical relationships. It is to be noted that once the chain of logical consequences is established or the relevant probabilities have been quantifies, it all makes a valid and logical form. Though it is important to note that this argument continues to be misguided if there is no chain that is created.

The example used in this discussion is of "gun registration may lead to gun confiscation". It is used to explain six different kinds of slippage. First, when all the owners of guns have gotten their firearms registered, the law making bodies would know from where to seize them. The dealer's of arms argue against this control; however the stance of the government officials is clear. They believe that if any exception is made, the others would follow soon and there would be no control over its sale and purchase (Delattre, 2006).

Second is the legal rule, in the past the government was required to look every where for arms, in every house on the block which goes against the law laid by the constitution. Registering arms will rectify that problem. Thirdly, carrying a gun may become less important as people will start taking it as a luxury then a necessarily. Similarly the trouble of getting the guns registered may ...