A green energy consultancy's report recommends that the city transition to biomass fuel, asserting that biomass is an organic power source and is therefore inherently sustainable for urban energy grids. To support this claim, the report notes that organic material naturally decomposes in nature without human intervention, guaranteeing that relying on biomass will not cause lasting environmental damage.
Which of the following best describes the logical flaw in the consultancy's reasoning?
- It relies on an ambiguity in the word 'organic' to infer environmental safety from biological composition.Cevap
- BIt assumes without justification that non-organic energy sources are inherently harmful to the environment.
- CIt ignores potential counterarguments regarding the financial feasibility of transitioning to biomass energy.
- DIt mistakes a condition necessary for natural decomposition for a condition that guarantees immediate sustainability.
- EIt focuses on the chemical decomposition of biomass rather than evaluating the total carbon emissions produced during combustion.
Cevap
The argument relies on an ambiguity in the word 'organic' to infer environmental safety from biological composition.
The correct answer correctly identifies that the argument commits the flaw of equivocation. The author uses 'organic' in a technical, biological sense in the premises (referring to matter derived from living organisms that decomposes naturally) and then shifts to a broader, colloquial sense of 'organic' in the conclusion (implying eco-friendly or environmentally benign). Because biological decomposition does not guarantee environmental sustainability when used as fuel, the argument relies on an ambiguous term to draw an invalid conclusion.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Equivocation and Shift in Term Meaning