Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
Artistic merit sometimes takes a very long time to become apparent.
|
A history on when and how these statues were erected would tell you that this argument is a silly one. These statues were Mass produced for the most part
Quote:
====================================
Not really. Slippery slope, itself, is not a fallacy. Sometimes one thing really does lead to another, then another.
A slippery slope argument, essentially is an examination of the consequences of the assumptions and arguments that lead to a conclusion. If we find those consequences distasteful, we may want to re-examine our assumptions and arguments.
Once we approve of artifact removal on ethical grounds, we must consider that, say, a homosexual could quite fairly perceive many religious symbols as symbols of hatred. Should they go too? Is ISIL's destruction of cultural heritage not an atrocity, since they believe it to morally sound?
A slippery slope argument asks "where do we draw the line, and how?" If we can answer that successfully, then the argument has been addressed. If we don't have a good answer, that's a problem.
|
It is a fallacy.
That argument runs in reverse though too then. If you can't take that down, then you might remove old graffiti with racial epithets.
It's possible we weigh each act of removal on its own merits, no? Can we not decide to keep Washington and not Hitler? If one extreme is good or bad, we must accept all as such and proceed accordingly? No