Skip to main content

Slippery Slope

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics

Abstract

In global bioethics, the slippery slope argument has been used in such issues as abortion, legalizing marijuana, physicians having to disclose their HIV status, euthanasia, and gene therapy. Its uses in ethical controversies on the latter two topics have been most prominent, and the main examples treated in this entry are slippery slope arguments about euthanasia and gene therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 1,799.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bashford, A., & Levine, P. (2010). Introduction: Eugenics and the modern world. In A. Bashford & P. Levine (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics (pp. 3–24). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley, M. C. (1966). Thinking straight. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corner, A., Hahn, U., & Oaksford, M. (2011). The psychological mechanism of the slippery slope argument. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 133–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W. (1995). Can human genetic enhancement be prohibited? The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 20, 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, T. (1982). What’s wrong with slippery slope arguments? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 12, 303–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtug, N. (1993). Human gene therapy: Down the slippery slope. Bioethics, 7(5), 402–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneale, W., & Kneale, M. (1962). The development of logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Launis, V. (2002). Human gene therapy and the slippery slope argument. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 5(2), 169–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachels, J. (1986). The end of life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D. (1994). Debunking the slippery slope argument against human germ-line gene therapy. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 19(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saliger, F. (2007). The dam burst and slippery slope argument in medical law and medical ethics. Zeitschrift fur Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, 9, 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thouless, R. H. (1930). Straight and crooked thinking. London: English Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. (1992). Slippery slope arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Further Readings

  • Schauer, F. (1985). Slippery slopes. Harvard Law Review, 99(2), 361–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Burg, W. (1991). The slippery slope argument. Ethics, 102, 42–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volokh, E. (2002). The mechanisms of the slippery slope. Harvard Law Review, 116(4), 1026–1137.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas Walton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Walton, D. (2016). Slippery Slope. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09483-0_394

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics