Many plant varieties used in industrially developed nations to improve cultivated crops come from less developed nations. No compensation is paid on the grounds that the plants used are “the common heritage of humanity.” Such reasoning is, however, flawed. After all, no one suggests that coal, oil, and ores should be extracted without payment.

Which of the following best describes an aspect of the method used by the author in the argument above?

(A) The author proceeds from a number of specific observations to a tentative generalization.

(B)The author applies to the case under discussion facts about phenomena assumed to be similar in some relevant respect.

(C) A position is strengthened by showing that the opposite of that position would have logically absurd consequences.

(D) A line of reasoning is called into question on the grounds that it confuses cause and effect in a causal relation.（B）

(E) An argument is analyzed by separating statements of fact from individual value judgments.

这题B对，可以理解，但C就不对吗？我觉得C的确是author论证时用的方法呀。谢谢！

The logic of the passage deploys that the free use of crops in indistrial nations might be unreasonable because the natural energy cannot be extracted freely. The statement commits a fallacy of "false analogy" as B claims.

个人认为，作者的意思是说，没人说不付费就可以使用coal,oil等。

说明plant varieties的使用也是付费的，而不是free.两个例子是在比较相似之处。

而C表示的则是相反的意思。

這題我還是不太懂耶,雖然說可以用排除法來選

只是原文我還是看不太懂,有沒有人願意解釋一下?

感激不盡

发达国家用的许多庄稼是从不发达国家那来的，而且声称“庄稼是人类的共同遗产”不给任何经济补偿。这个理由有问题，毕竟，没有人说煤油矿是可以不付费就可以开采的。