I am interested in the slippery slope. Must I accept that the first instance or

I am interested in the slippery slope. Must I accept that the first instance or

I am interested in the slippery slope. Must I accept that the first instance or "slope event" that gives rise to the argument is in itself without much consequence? Or, can I argue slippery slope AND insist that the first instance (developing a parcel of public land, for example, that will result eventually in all the virgin land's demise) is a mistake?

Read another response by Michael Cholbi
Read another response about Rationality