1. The slippery slope fallacy fallacy. That's not a typo. Those that refute the slippery slope argument do so by putting forth their own fallacy. They create a strawman argument on the subject.
2. At it's core the slippery slope argument is a layman's attempt to explain probability outside of math. In other words as you do W+X+Y the probability of Z happening increases.
3. Those that declare it a fallacy create a strawman saying that those using the term are saying if W+X+ Y happens then Z is 100% sure to happen and there is no way that can be true.
4. This strawman is employed by those that want W, X, and/or Y to happen and want to debunk the warning that it increases the probability of Z happening. (They may also secretly want Z to happen)
5. The term is used because everyone knows that if you walk down a slope you have a chance to fall. If you walk down the same slope after a rain your chances of a fall increase. You also know that you have a chance of not falling.
6. Those employing the strawman that the slippery slope logic is a fallacy are saying you no longer acknowledge the change of not falling which was never part of the argument. The original argument is that slope plus water plus booze increases the chance/probability of a fall.
7. They can't refute that logic so instead they create a strawman and argue that you are claiming the person will fall. That simply isn't true.
