Dam break argument

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A dam breach argument , also known as the slippery slope argument or the inclined plane argument , is a method of argumentation (or rhetorical technique) that consists in the opponent warning the proponent about taking a certain step or a certain action and asserts that this action “breaks the dam” or is the beginning of an inclined plane and thus, piece by piece (as a chain of events / domino effect ) inevitably leads to further negative consequences (hence also "the inclined plane argument" or " slippery " -Slope argument ").

The argumentation pattern is not strictly deductive, but rather a practical, application-oriented element of the ethical discussion.

For the argument to work as a counter-argument, the prognosis must be plausible and the prognosticated end action must be considered morally rejectable.

Alternative names

Designations in German-speaking countries are:

  • Domino effect
  • Avalanche effect
  • phrases like:
    • Spiral of violence
    • Poisoning the atmosphere
    • Lowering inhibition thresholds
    • set a precedent
    • Dull
    • Habituation effect
    • the Pandora's box open

Further names in the Anglo-Saxon area are:

  • wedge-argument (wedge argument), the thin edge of the wedge (the thin end of a wedge)
  • the foot in the door (The foot in the door)
  • the genie in the bottle (The Ghost in the bottle)
  • the snowball argument (the snowball effect )
  • the camels' nose in / under the tent (The Camel nose in / under the tent)

Characteristics

According to Douglas Walton, there are six typical characteristics:

  1. Use in specific decision-making situations
  2. Use in a dialogue with the character of conviction
  3. Indication of dire consequences
  4. The arguments are based on assumptions and hypotheses and are therefore refutable.
  5. Their powers of persuasion vary, but they rarely represent fallacies or fallacies.
  6. Their application often leads to reversing the burden of proof on the other party.

Examples

In the discussion about new medical procedures, the dam break argument is used by opponents to restrict them, for example in pre-implantation diagnosis (PGD).

Another example of the dam-break argument is the discussion on the permission of the so-called " rescue torture ", which arose in Germany primarily in the course of the kidnapping of the Frankfurt banker's son Jakob von Metzler and which was publicly discussed. The subject of the discussion was the possible permission in an absolute emergency situation to force an offender to testify by an official under torture or torture-like methods, if this could save a victim in mortal danger. A large part of the legal doctrine countered this consideration with the dam-break argument that it was impossible to estimate where the torture would begin and where it would end, which measures could be used when, how one would have to deal with a relatively pain-insensitive perpetrator, when definitely no other - "legitimate" - Measure led more to the desired information, etc. The fear was raised that - if one enters this territory once - one “breaks through the dam” and in the course of time, unintentionally, as one crosses a point of no return , the principle of prohibition of torture give up step by step.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Markus Zimmermann-Acklin: Euthanasia: a theological-ethical investigation. Volume 79 of Études d'éthique chrétienne , Volume 79 of Studies on Theological Ethics. 2nd edition. Saint-Paul, 2002, ISBN 3727814012 , page 346 ff.
  2. ↑ a b Georg Pfleiderer: Time horizons of the ethical: On the importance of temporality in fundamental and bioethics. W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 2006, ISBN 3170191128 , page 226.
  3. ^ A b c Markus Zimmermann-Acklin: Euthanasia: a theological-ethical investigation. Volume 79 of Études d'éthique chrétienne , Volume 79 of Studies on Theological Ethics. 2nd edition. Saint-Paul, 2002, ISBN 3727814012 , page 346.
  4. ↑ Tobias Krohmer: To clone or not to clone? Analysis and evaluation of the bioethical arguments on the subject of cloning. LIT Verlag, Münster 2007, ISBN 3825802868 , page 340.
  5. ↑ Quoted from: Markus Zimmermann-Acklin: Euthanasia: a theological-ethical investigation. Volume 79 of Études d'éthique chrétienne , Volume 79 of Studies on Theological Ethics. 2nd edition. Saint-Paul, 2002, ISBN 3727814012 , page 346.