Why is the slipper slope argument considered a logical fallacy when it is demonstrably true?

Why is the slipper slope argument considered a logical fallacy when it is demonstrably true?

>Canadian education
A slippery slope argument does not always have to be a fallacy.
It's obvious to anyone that if you give leftists an inch, they'll ask for a mile.

Because you aren't considering the argument at hand. The slippery slope is true, but that doesn't mean there isn't a logical place to anchor.

Fag marriage will lead to beastiality and pedo acceptance is a true slippery slope, but it doesn't address why fag tolerance is moral/immoral or logical.

Slippery slope is invalid if you say we go from a to z, it is valid if you can show a leads to b, then c, then d, then e and so on.

Here is a legitimate slippery slope argument.

>Person 1:I think any two consenting adults should be allowed to have sex
>Person 2:Then you feel a brother and sister should be allowed to have sex

Person 2 didn't use a logical fallacy. Person 2 used Person 1's logic and applied it to incest.

Here is an illegitimate slippery slope argument.

>Person 1: I think two consenting adults should be allowed to have sex should be allowed so long as they're not related as the offspring would be retarded
>Person 2: But that would lead to incest

Person 2 used a logical fallacy. Person 2 ignored the constraints put forward by Person 1.

However if person 2 said "I don't think society will take the constraints of your argument into account and will eventually lead to incest" person 2 would've put forward a legitimate argument.

Because it shifts the scope of the argument.

True, it doesn't address why it is immoral, but it can tell us where to stop.

If everyone goes around saying love knows no bounds then yeah, fag marriage leads to pedo rapists

Slippery slope fallacy:

>a could lead to b
>b could lead to c
>therefore a WILL lead to b and c

The fallacious part is the jump from the first to premises to the conclusion

Its because its inferred rather than a direct correlation. To prove the slippery slop you need to explain how it happens.

The slippery slope would not be true in a vacuum but it is true in our current circumstance. That is, it's true when a small group of individuals with a great deal of wealth and influence are pushing degeneracy with the goal of undermining and destroying your culture. The people that label it a universal fallacy are the same people trying to destroy Western Civilization.

Simply depends on the situation. It's not always fallacious.

If a implies b and b implies c then a implies c

not a fallacy

Its not a logical fallacy per se, but it is poor logic. The conclusions don't follow from the reasoning. For example, if pedophilia is legalized it would give children the right to consent. You could say that will cause a slippery slope making dogs able to consent, but dogs are effectively property and giving them rights is a completely different area. Its correlating two things into a single process because the arguer has a bias against them. Both acceptance of pedophilia and bestiality are parallel and unrelated movements for sexual acceptance. I'm sure many of them are disgusted by each other.

Because the Jews like a slow boil and making the argument that one thing leads to another blows up their plans.

How would acceptance of pedophilia destroy Western Civlization when its acceptance was somewhat regular in most of our history, including at the beginning? It isn't a slope, its a hilly landscape. Pedophilia was accepted and/or gaining acceptance in many places in the west in the 70s.

"Jews!" isn't an argument.

Its still valid. I few this like that picture just liberalism. Gay marriage didn't lead to pedi acceptance liberals did. The subject matter is irrelevant

"Jews" wasn't the extent of my argument. The inclusion of Jews doesn't make an argument invalid chaim.

The slippery slope has little to do with pure logic

There are a lot of problems with pedophilia. For example, imagine that you're the leader of a traditional family, intending to raise your children to be strong, responsible, independent citizens who will carry on your family name and wealth. Would you want a bunch of creepy pedos seducing them and/or trying to sexualize them before they were mature and had reached the potential needed to carry on your high standards?

But even if I accept your reasoning, pedophilia is not the end game. It's just one step toward further degeneracy.

It is not always a fallacy. If you explain the detrimental effects of a precedent, then you have an argument.This works best for issues concerning law.
Argument
Government bans assault rifles because they are dangerous. Therefore, if the only vetting process towards banning something is societal perceived danger, then we also give the government to theoretically ban aspects of freedom of speech, and small firearms.
It is basically only a fallacy when no evidence or reasoning is backing your claim.
If John and Joe have consensual sex on private property, the next thing you know there will be homosexual brothels exploiting boys across the country.
The lack of reasoning, and the assertion of "will" instead of "can" makes it a fallacy.

If they were seduced without you noticing and stopping it you would not be a good leader of a traditional family in the first place. The common idea of pedos being creepy pervs who stalk kids is complete bullshit, most of it happens from trusted family members and family friends. There also studies showing it doesn't necessarily harm kids, but lets not open that chestnut.

What do you think is more degenerate than pedophilia then, what comes next if its being orchestrated?

You don't even need to go as far as the moral implication. It's physically not healthy for a prepubescent girl to have sex and certainly not during their early puberty where they can get pregnant but risk all sorts of issues from not being fully developed yet.

A man cannot monitor his children at all times. He also cannot monitor his wife at all times. This is part of the reason that both adultery and pedophilia are bad.

Homosexuality and transgenderism are both significantly more degenerate in my opinion. They have gained traction earlier because of greater resistance to pedophilia in this particular culture. In my opinion, future steps will include bestiality and incest. Anything previously considered sexually taboo will no longer be taboo. All traditional virtues will continue to be erased, while their corresponding vices will continue to be celebrated in every field and circumstance possible.

It's unfortunately difficult to provide many more specific examples, as most traditional values have already been completely undermined. There's not much left to give before we reach a state of total viciousness.

Because of how it's used. Saying "Allowing A will eventually lead to F, therefore, we shouldn't allow A."

You're not even addressing A on it's merits or lack thereof. You're just arguing that it will eventually lead to some other bad thing.

Address the issue at hand. Not some other issue that isn't being discussed.

>It's physically not healthy for a prepubescent girl to have sex and certainly not during their early puberty where they can get pregnant but risk all sorts of issues from not being fully developed yet.
what about blowjobs?

That's a poor argument. We allow adults to do unhealthy and/or dangerous things with their kids all the time, because the responsibility defers to the adults. We allow parents to let their kids shoot guns, eat unhealthy food, etc. Sexuality is not significantly different. These arguments always fall apart because the preconception is made that pedophiles must be bad people automatically and do not care about the welfare of kids.

You wouldn't need to monitor them at all times, there would be many signs. Children lack the lying and faking capacity of adults and its fairly obvious when something is going on with them, so I don't see the significant correlation between adultery and pedophilia. People who don't realize their kids are having big experiences without them are bad parents.

The taboo thing is interesting. In terms of pedophilia many sexual acts happen because of the taboo rather than pure attraction to kids. In that way accepting it may be more beneficial than thought.

A complete seduction can happen in a period of time that is less than the maximum allowed absence for a responsible parent.

Once all taboos have been broken, people will begin to understand why they were in place originally. It has nothing to do with evil, but rather the fact that taboo behaviors cause more objective social harm than good.