Argument from setting a precedent

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Argument from precedent is a common fallacy in discussion, for example on committees or in meetings. It consists in saying that to act correctly in circumstances X would be inadvisable, in case others consider that this would set a precedent for acting in circumstances Y, where (it is argued) X and Y are superficially similar but (on close examination) are radically different. See Microcosmographia Academica for the original statement.

The fallacy is similar to the slippery slope argument.