Continuing the series begun here, we now present a refutation of the pro-green statement:
We first need to determine the “opposite view on the topic.” We will take the more general “green is NOT the best color” position, as opposed to “green is the not-best (i.e. worst) color,” or “not-green (perhaps magenta?) is the best color.” To show that green is not the best color, we aim to argue that “best” is an inherently subjective term and that no objective measure of “most satisfactory” can be made.
The preceding argument has apparently taken the planet earth as the proving grounds for its argument, but why? Just beyond our planet’s atmosphere is a 13-billion lightyear-wide expanse of open space appearing to us as black peppered with stars of many hues. Why not set this expanse as our domain and claim black as the most prevalent color in existence? Similarly, white light from the sun is incident upon our planet every moment of every day. Why not then claim that the quantity of white is greater than the quantity of green? The selection of the surface of earth as the zone of quantity determination is arbitrary and subjective.
In the same way, the scale by which the preceding argument details green as the most satisfactory in quality is incomplete in its refusal to acknowledge any negative aspect of the color. Many colors are used in very positive ways, but many colors, including green, are used to great detriment to society. As a few examples we might cite the associations of green with envy and jealousy, cuckoldry, and similar traditionally negative ideas. And again, we ask: who says these things are bad and the survival of our planet good in the first place? Any measure of quality must necessarily depend upon the measurer; one man’s emerald treasure is another man’s chlorine poisoning, as it were. To briefly touch upon the notion of “degree,” we again note that the above argument claims “transcending mortality” as the most important thing, but why not “eating blueberry pie”? In this case blue would clearly be “most important.”
The ultimate point here is that, while the syllogism might be valid, the definition of terms involves enough wiggle room to render the argument unsound.