I wonder is it George Washington next week, and is it, Thomas Jefferson, the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?” I notice that Stonewall Jackson’s coming down. When talking about the removal of public statues, President Trump went down a slippery slope. Removal of Robert E Lee Statue from Column in New Orleans. “At what point are we going to OK marrying inanimate objects? Can I marry this table, or this, you know, clock? Can we marry dogs?”ĭirectTV made fun of the slippery slope fallacy in a commercial. In talking about gay marriage, Republican candidate for Governor, Rebecca Kleefisch went down a slippery slope that led to tables and dogs. If you are not careful, you will find yourself arguing the ending claim and miss the real debate.
A slippery slope causes the discussion to get off track. This is done without proving these negative things will happen. Oftentimes a speaker will argue one bad thing will result in many other bad things. Bringing up video games is a way to divert the audience’s attention and avoid the question. Yes, it may be true video games affect people but that doesn’t mean we should or should not have universal background checks.
The question: Can you envision a way of supporting the universal background checks bill? Senator Lamar Alexander’s answer: Video games are a bigger problem than guns because video games affect people. In the video clip, “Republican senator says guns don’t kill people, video games do” notice how Senator Ted Lamar (R) distracts from the issue of background checks with the topic of video games. It may be true that there are too many issues on the ballot, but that doesn’t make the school choice something we should vote for or not. But we also urge you to note that there are so many issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous.” The argument at hand is whether or not to vote for school choice but the speaker distracts us by bringing up the point that there are too many issues on the ballot. Take this example, “We admit that voting to support school choice is a popular measure. It seeks to “win” an argument by diversion. Why is this a problem? It is a problem because it sidetracks the argument at hand. Sometimes it happens when the speaker changes the subject and sometimes it happens when the speaker brings up irrelevant information to the topic. When the opponents’ dogs encounter the fishy smell, it distracts them from their mission of fox chasing.Ī red herring fallacy occurs when a speaker distracts listeners with sensational, irrelevant material. If they are ahead in the chase, they can stop and drag the fish across the fox’s scent and make the trail go in a different direction. Riders sometimes keep a fish, a red herring, in their saddlebags. In foxhunting, riders on horses follow their dogs who are chasing a fox. A red herring fallacy gets its name from the sport of fox hunting.
0 kommentar(er)
