Enter into many discussions of controversial subjects
and sooner or later you will be hit with the Slippery Slope Logic argument or accusation. It goes something like this:
You – “People who are drunk are more likely to be victimized by crime.”
Opponent - “You are blaming the Victim.”
You – “No. I said that a person who has certain Factors is at higher risk of being victimized.” Opponent – “You are a Victim-Blamer."
You - “No, I am not.”
Opponent – “Yes, you are!”
Once Slippery Slope Logic is introduced into the discussion, the discussion is likely to spiral into an argument with no resolution.
Slippery Slope Logic follows the pattern:
You – “People who are drunk are more likely to be victimized by crime.”
Opponent - “You are blaming the Victim.”
You – “No. I said that a person who has certain Factors is at higher risk of being victimized.” Opponent – “You are a Victim-Blamer."
You - “No, I am not.”
Opponent – “Yes, you are!”
Once Slippery Slope Logic is introduced into the discussion, the discussion is likely to spiral into an argument with no resolution.
Slippery Slope Logic follows the pattern:
Many people think A.
Many people who think A, think B.
Many people who think B, think C.
Many people who think C, think D.
Thus, many people who think A, think D.
It “seems” logical. Thinking A leads to thinking D. Here’s the problem. Let’s say 40% or people is “many” people.
Many people who think A, think B.
Many people who think B, think C.
Many people who think C, think D.
Thus, many people who think A, think D.
It “seems” logical. Thinking A leads to thinking D. Here’s the problem. Let’s say 40% or people is “many” people.
40% of A becomes B. 40% of B becomes C. 40% of C becomes D,
so 40% of A becomes D.
WRONG!!! Actually, 6.4% of A become D. We could think of
6.4% as actually being few.
Therefore, in reality, all else being equal, few people who think A, think D. The real problem with these arguments is the other underlying
assumption that “all else being equal” is rarely true.Slippery Slope Logic also shows how some becomes many which becomes most which becomes all as in labeling and stereotyping phrases such as “Men do this, or Women think that”.
Let’s take a look at the Victim-Blaming argument
used against many self-defense instructors.
1.
Many self-defense instructors think that there
are actions people can take to lower their risk of being victimized by crime.
2.
Thinking someone can do something to lower risk
means thinking he or she has some control over what happens or had happened.
3.
Having some control means having some
responsibility
4.
Having responsibility means you have fault for
what happens.
5.
Therefore, self-defense instructors blame crime
victims.
6.
Self-defense instructors are Victim-Blamers.
This type of logical is very effective because each step in
the process seems to make “sense” if all else is equal. But remember, all else is rarely equal.
More Slippery Slope Logic:1. Victims don’t want to be victimized by crime.
2. Not wanting it means not inviting
it.
3. Not inviting it means not
doing anything to attract it.
4. Not attracting it mean no
responsibility.
5. No responsibility means no
control.
6. No control means no power.
7. No power means there was nothing
the Victim could do to alter what happen to him/her.
8. Thus, anything that suggests
anything to the contrary is Victim Blaming.
Are Feminists really Victim Blamers?
1. Many Feminists think men and women are equals.
2. Thinking
men and women are equal means thinking that women are as capable and powerful
as men.
3. Being
capable and powerful gives a woman control over her life.
4. Having
control over her life means she can alter events.
5. Having the
ability to alter events mean having responsibility.
6. Having
responsibility means having fault for what happens.
7. Therefore,
women who are victimized are to blame for what happens to them.
Slippery Slope Logic tells us that Feminists are Victim Blamers.
Self-Defense instructors are Victim Blamers. The problem with labeling all
these people as Victim Blamers is it puts them in the same category as the true
Victim-Blamers. A true Victim-Blamer thinks “that woman deserved to be raped
because she wore that dress”.
Victim-Blaming does exist. It
is a real problem that needs to be addressed. It needs to be solved. But mass accusations
of Victim-Blaming creates a backlash. It creates confusion. It diverts resources
away from solving the real problem. Problem solving requires looking deeply
into all the sources of the problem, not just cherry picking the sources that
meet the requirements of promoting a particular agenda.