Wikipedia talk:Slippery slope

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

Eh[edit]

The nutshell and conclusion of this essay don't really match the title. –xeno^talk 16:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback is good. How can they be brought into line? The slippery slope is a logical fallacy. (Don't step on the slippery slope, or else you'll slide all the way to the bottom.) This is sometimes seen in the argument edit warring is bad, so don't revert. We disagree with that because sometimes reverts are good, but in moderation (the middle). Perhaps this explanation could be added to the essay. Thoughts? You're a specialist on paradoxes, aren't you. Jehochman ^Talk 20:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think maybe it just needs expanded to explain how edge cases relate to slippery slopes, or an example of a slippery slope that edge cases lead into. That the slippery slope is a logical fallacy means it shouldn't be used in an argument, ironically it is being used here! But are you using it here in the "logically valid form" as described at the article? –xeno^talk 20:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not really what the slippery slope fallacy warns us against though. We're not avoiding change because it might lead to worse change later. The slippery slope argument is a warning against avoiding change for the sake of a slippery slope. I think this essay goes in completely the opposite direction. El Dubs (talk) 22:04, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]