Kluzký svah a eutanazie: případová analýza
| Title in English | Slippery Slope and Euthanasia: a Case Study |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2018 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | The slippery slope is often characterized as an example of an argumentation fallacy (Hurley 2015, Damer 2012, Murray & Kujundzic 2005, Smith 2005, Govier 1982). However, this is questioned in contemporary approaches, and the slippery slope is viewed as a specific type of argumentation that can be acceptable in the discussion if it fulfills certain conditions (van Eemeren et al., 2009, Volokh 2003, Walton 1992). Within a pragmatic-dialectical approach to argumentation, a slippery slope can be understood as a variant of a pragmatic argument scheme (the so-called argument of consequences), which emphasizes a series of necessary steps leading to a generally unwanted result. The argumentation error can occur here in case of incorrect application of this scheme if the proponent is unable to prove that the unwanted effect occurs (van Eemeren et al., 2009). In our contribution, we will present an analysis of selected real examples from the political context in the discussion on euthanasia presented by Czech political parties on their web pages between 2006 and 2017, in which the argument of the sloping slope is used. |