This has always bothered me, because I can think of instance where bad behaviors can definetly lead to worst behaviors. The classic, if you smoke pot you’ll use harder drugs, is clearly not true in itself. Weed doesn’t cause you to want to do harder drugs, but since weed is illegal in a lot of places, it could expose you to hard drugs and you could become a user. I understand that this is not always the case, but I’d like to better understand why this is considered a fallacy when it could be true sometimes.
In: Culture
You can’t base an argument on the worst possible outcome that you can imagine.
>Slippery slope: I you have a baby, that baby could grow up to be the next Hitler, and then that baby starts World War Four, and then that war destroys the whole human race. Ergo, we have to murder your baby.
Is any of that a proven outcome? No. There is no evidence to support any of the escalating threats in the hypothetical scenario.
If you have **proof** of a negative outcome (say you have proof that a certain percentage of marijuana users become IV drug users) then it’s supported by evidence you can cite, and is no longer a fearmongering slippery slope
Latest Answers