Can you outsmart the slippery slope fallacy? - Elizabeth Cox

Prevodilac: Jovana Babic Lektor: Milenka Okuka

On the plains of the Serengeti, a dung beetle

Na ravnicama Serengetija, balegar

rolls his perfectly sculpted ball of dung away from competitors.

kotrlja svoju perfektno oblikovanu kuglicu izmeta što dalje od protivnika.

In this Canadian river, a beaver rushes to reinforce her dam

U ovoj kanadskoj reci, dabar užurbano popravlja svoju branu

as it threatens to burst.

kojoj preti raspadanje.

As the snowball thunders down the mountainside,

Dok se grudva snega kotrlja niz planinu,

gaining momentum, the arctic foxes run for cover—

dobijajući snagu, arktičke lisice traže zaklon -

I can't stand these nature programs.

Ne podnosim ove dokumentarce o prirodi.

Always the same story, and not a rational actor in sight. What else is on?

Uvek ista priča, bez ijedne racionalne misli na vidiku. Šta se još dešava?

It’s April 1954, and Vietnamese nationalists are on the verge of victory

April je 1954, i vijetnamski nacionalisti su na pragu pobede

against French forces fighting for control of Vietnam.

u ratu protiv francuske vojske za kontrolu Vijetnama.

Their victory could lead to an independent Vietnam

Njihova pobeda bi mogla dovesti do osnivanja nezavisnog Vijetnama

under communist leader Ho Chi Minh.

pod komunističkim vođstvom Ho Ši Mina.

The United States President, Dwight D. Eisenhower,

Predsednik Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, Dvajt D. Ajzenhauer

is holding a press conference to comment on these developments.

održava konferenciju za novinare da bi prokomentarisao ove događaje.

Well, if you really must.

Pa, ako baš moraš.

Eisenhower claims that by virtue of what he calls the “falling domino principle,”

Ajzenhauer tvrdi da bi zbog principa koji on naziva ,,domino efekat”

communist control of Vietnam would be the “beginning of a disintegration”

komunistička vlast u Vijetnamu bila „početak raspada”

that would be certain to cause “incalculable loss.”

koji bi sigurno izazvao „neprocenjiv gubitak”.

The beetles and beavers may be beyond my reach,

Balegari i dabrovi su možda van mog domašaja,

but surely here's someone I can reason with.

ali ovde sigurno postoji neko koga mogu urazumiti.

Now, Mr. President, let’s take a deep breath, shall we?

Sada, gospodine predsedniče, hajde da udahnemo duboko, može?

It’s a big leap—or, one might say, a long slide—

Veliki je to skok - ili bi možda mogli reći duga nizbrdica -

from communist governance of Vietnam

od ostvarivanja komunističke vlasti u Vijetnamu

to the global spread of authoritarian communist regimes.

do globalnog proširenja autoritativnog komunističkog režima.

It’s as if we were to say you were clothed,

To bi bilo kao kao kada bismo rekli da ste vi bili obučeni,

now you’re in your underwear,

a sada ste u donjem vešu,

so soon everyone in the world will be completely naked.

i zbog toga će uskoro svi ljudi na svetu biti potpuno goli.

Don’t worry, I may have that power, but I promise not to use it.

Ne brinite, iako mogu to da ostvarim, obećavam da neću.

Now, as I was saying, this kind of argument,

Da se vratimo na temu, ovaj argument

where one step, let’s call it A, kicks off a string of events

gde jedan korak, nazvaćemo ga A, započne lančanu reakciju

that inevitably culminates in an extreme scenario,

koja na kraju neizbežno prouzrokuje ekstremnu posledicu,

let’s call it Z, is known as a slippery slope.

nazvaćemo je Z, poznat je pod nazivom klizava nizbrdica.

Many such arguments focus on catastrophe,

Mnogi ovakvi argumenti se zavšavaju katastrofalno,

but the slope to an extreme positive outcome can be just as slippery.

ali nizbrdica do ekstremno pozitivnog ishoda može biti podjednako klizava.

The trouble with this kind of argument is that,

Problem sa ovim tipom argumenta je da,

in presenting Z is the inevitable outcome of A,

ako prikažemo Z kao neizbežnu posledicu A,

it almost always overstates the likelihood that Z will happen

gotovo uvek preuveličavamo verovatnoću da će se Z desiti,

if A happens.

ako se A desi.

Why?

Zašto?

Allow me to trouble you with some math.

Dozvolite mi da vas malo smorim matematikom.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that, taken individually,

Hajde da pretpostavimo, u ime argumenta, da su svi individualni koraci

each step between A and Z is independent from the others

između A i Z međusobno nezavisani

and very likely— 99%.

i vrlo verovatni - 99%.

So the probability that A causes B, that B causes C,

Dakle, verovatnoća da A uzrokuje B, B uzrokuje C,

that C causes D, and so on, is each 99%.

C uzrokuje D i tako dalje, pojedinačno iznosi 99%.

Even so, each additional step adds an opportunity to alter the outcome,

Uprkos tome, svaki dodatni korak povećava verovatnoću da se krajnji ishod izmeni,

and A is only 78% likely to lead to Z—

a u našem primeru, A dovodi do Z u svega 78% slučajeva -

far from an inevitability.

što nije toliko neizbežno.

If there’s a 95% likelihood of each step,

Ako je verovatnoća za svaki korak 95%,

the chance that A leads to Z plummets to about 28%.

šansa da Z nastaje zbog A pada na oko 28%.

If there’s a 90% likelihood at each step—

Ako je verovatnoća za svaki korak 90%,

still very likely by most standards—

što je i dalje veoma visok procenat -

the chance that A leads to Z is only 7%.

šansa da A dovodi do Z je svega 7%.

And if 24 of the 25 steps between A and Z are 99% likely,

A ako su 24 od 25 koraka između A i Z 99% verovatni,

and one is 50% likely,

a jedan 50%,

the chance that A leads to Z

onda šansa da će A uzrokovati Z

goes down from 78% to 39%.

pada sa 78% na 39%.

Back to your situation.

Da se vratimo na tvoju situaciju.

I won’t deny you have reason to be concerned.

Neću poricati da imaš razlog da budeš zabrinut.

You’re warily watching as powerful authoritarian communist regimes

Ti oprezno posmatraš kako moćni autorativni kominustički režimi

in the Soviet Union and China try to spread their form of governance.

u Sovjetskom Savezu i Kini pokušavaju da prošire svoj oblik vladavine.

But let’s take a look at the chain of events you suggest:

Međutim, hajde da sagledamo niz događaja koji te brinu:

You say that the countries surrounding Vietnam

ti smatraš da će sve zemlje koje okružuju Vijetnam

would all soon fall under communist rule;

uskoro pasti pod komunističku vlast;

that this would result in a loss of essential trade

to bi dovelo do prekida trgovine

with these countries for others;

sa ovim državama u korist drugih;

that with no non-communist nations left to trade with,

da neće ostati nijedna nekoministička zemlja za trgovinu,

Japan would be pressured towards communism

Japan bi bio pod pritiskom da prihvati komunizam,

and that this, in turn, would threaten Australia and New Zealand.

a to bi, zauzvrat, dovelo u opasnost Australiju i Novi Zeland.

Your ultimate fear, if I may presume,

Ono što tebe zapravo najviše zabrinjava

is that this will in turn threaten the United States.

je kako će sve ovo ugroziti SAD.

Is this a possibility? Sure.

Da li je moguće da to toga dođe? Naravno.

Where I take issue is with your comparison to dominos.

Ono što meni smeta je tvoje poređenje sa dominama.

These complex real-world events are not, in fact, like dominoes,

Ovi stvarni komplikovani događaji ne nalikuju, zapravo, dominama,

where when the first one falls,

kod kojih čim prva padne,

it becomes a certainty that the last will fall.

sigurno je da će i poslednja pasti.

For any one of these events, a number of possible outcomes could result,

Za bilo koji od ovih događaja postoji gomila drugih mogućih ishoda,

each affecting the other events in different ways.

gde svaki na jedinstven način utiče na druge događaje.

The possibilities are not a chain, they’re a web.

Ove mogućnosti nisu lanac, one su mreža.

It’s 1975, and after 20 years of conflict, and several million lives lost,

Godina je 1975, i posle 20 godina rata i nekoliko miliona izgubljenih života

North Vietnamese forces have taken control of the capital of South Vietnam.

trupe Severnog Vijetnama su zaposele glavni grad Južnog Vijetnama.

The war is over, and all of Vietnam is under communist control.

Rat je gotov, a ceo Vijetnam je pod kontrolom komunista.

Communist regimes have come to power in neighboring Laos and Cambodia,

Komunistički režim se takođe proširio i na okolne zemlje, Laos i Kambodžu,

where the regime will be responsible

gde će biti odgovoran

for the deaths of an estimated quarter of all Cambodians.

za smrt oko četvrtine svih Kambodžana.

Wait, there's more.

Sačekaj, ima još.

That first step you were trying to avoid happened,

Prvi korak koji si pokušao da izbegneš se desio,

but the end result you predicted did not.

ali krajnji rezultat koji si predvideo nije.

As for the steps between, a few happened; many did not.

Što se tiče koraka između, neki su se dogodili, a mnogi nisu.

Decades afterward, your fellow humans are still debating

Decenijama kasnije, ljudi i dalje raspravljaju oko toga

why events unfolded the way they did.

zašto su se stvari desile onako kako jesu.

And this is the trouble with slippery slope arguments.

I ovo predstavlja problem klizavih nizbrdica.

They focus exclusively on extreme outcomes,

One se samo fokusiraju na ekstremne ishode,

assigning those outcomes a degree of certainty or inevitability

koje smatraju sigurnim ili neizbežnim,

that rarely corresponds to reality.

a to je retko slučaj u realnosti.

They divert attention from other, more likely possibilities,

One skreću pažnju sa drugih, mnogo verovatnijih ishoda,

foreclosing discussions that might be more productive.

i prekidaju diskusiju koja bi mogla ispasti produktivna.

And that’s when they’re made in good faith.

A to je tako kada se konstruišu sa dobrim namerama.

Slippery slope arguments can also be intentionally structured

Argumenti tipa klizavih nizbrdica se takođe mogu namerno formulisati

to take advantage of people’s fears—

tako da iskorišćavaju ljudske strahove -

whatever your position on an issue,

bez obzira na tvoj stav u odnosu na problem,

it’s easy to come up with an extreme outcome that suits your aims.

veoma je lako doći do ekstremnog ishoda koji ti odgovara.

Best to avoid them entirely, eh?

Najbolje bi bilo da ih u potpunosti zaobiđemo, zar ne?