Beyond “Right Wing” and “Left Wing”: Critical Thought In The Days of Echo Chambers

Here in Canada, close to 15 years ago now, we had a robust debate over the legalization of same sex marriage. It seems like that was a long time ago, because now, people just marry who they like. A new legal right was conferred by the state, and we never could or would never take away that right (barring a theocratic takeover of the government, that is).

At the time, there were lots of “slippery slope” arguments, generally coming from the right side of the political spectrum. A “slippery slope” argument goes something like this: “if we all x, then y will happen”. The fallacy here is that x can directly cause y. “Slippery slope” arguments are generally used by those on the right side of the political spectrum, when they argue against change. Some arguments against same sex marriage employed the slippery slope fallacy-some thought that equal marriage could lead to rampant polygamy, or even marrying animals. Over time, we see that there was no “slope”.

Other arguments focused on tradition-preserving the institution of marriage, as it historically existed. There were more people against same sex marriage than you remember. If you changed your mind, you might not remember (Daniel Kahneman talks about this kind of “forgetting” in his book Thinking Fast and Slow).

There is a constant tension to be found between progress and tradition. We see it every day, as it plays out in our public institutions. Left wing and right wing as…