What method involves disproving an argument by demonstrating it leads to an absurd conclusion?

The method that involves disproving an argument by demonstrating that it leads to an absurd conclusion is known as "reductio ad absurdum." This technique is widely used in both philosophical and mathematical arguments to show that if an assertion were true, it would lead to contradictions or implausible outcomes, thus proving the assertion false.

In the context of this method, you take a statement or hypothesis and assume it is true. From this assumption, logical deductions are made that eventually lead to a conclusion that is obviously false or absurd. By establishing that the original statement leads to such a conclusion, one can effectively argue against its validity. This reasoning serves to negate the original assertion by highlighting its irrational implications.

For example, if someone argues that "if everyone owned everything, there would be no property," applying reductio ad absurdum would allow you to explore the absurdity of such an idea to show that it cannot logically hold true.

Other options, while related to various forms of argumentation or legal principles, do not convey the same process of disproving an assertion by illustrating its absurd consequences. Redaction involves editing text, "res ipsa loquitur" is a legal doctrine implying that negligence is apparent from the very nature of an accident or injury,