Ethicist: A standard defense of intellectual property rights over software algorithms holds that because creative labor produces economic utility, the creator is entitled to exclusive control over that utility. However, this principle implies that an artisan who discovers a more efficient bodily movement for laying masonry—which undeniably generates economic utility through creative effort—would likewise be entitled to forbid other builders from adopting that posture without permission. Since granting property rights over fundamental human movements would paralyze manual trades and is manifestly untenable, the premise that generating economic utility through creative labor alone justifies exclusive rights must be rejected.
Which of the following most accurately describes the ethicist's method of reasoning?
- showing that a general principle is untenable by demonstrating that its consistent application leads to an unacceptable consequenceAnswer
- Brejecting a claim on the grounds that the evidence cited in its defense is internally self-contradictory
- Cdenying the empirical premise that developing software algorithms involves genuine creative labor
- Dinferring that because software algorithms and manual trades share no material properties, no single regulatory principle can govern both
- Etreating an exceptional edge case as though it provides sufficient grounds to dismiss an otherwise universally valid rule