Organic Vs Synthetic Farming

The following was excerpted from the speech of a spokesperson for Synthetic Farm Products, Inc.:

"Many farmers who invested in the equipment needed to make the switch from synthetic to organic fertilizers and pesticides feel that it would be too expensive to resume synthetic farming at this point. But studies of farmers who switched to organic farming last year indicate that their current crop yields are lower. Hence their purchase of organic farming equipment, a relatively minor investment compared to the losses that would result from continued lower crop yields, cannot justify persisting on an unwise course. And the choice to farm organically is financially unwise, given that it was motivated by environmental rather than economic concerns."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc

The presented speech's reasoning is flawed on many counts.

A study has been cited to drive home the point that organic farming gives lower yield than synthetic farming. However, the source of the study has not been mentioned. If it was conducted by Synthetic Farm Products Inc., the chances of it being fair and unbiased are pretty low. On the other hand, if it was conducted by a neutral agency, one may take it seriously. Making the source of study clear would make the reasoning more credible.

Further, the speech tries to encourage farmers to switch to synthetic farming by claiming that the money wasted in buying equipment for organic farming is peanuts compared to losses that would result from continued lower crop yield. Again, it is not clear how much lower the yield from organic farming is. Will the "extra" yield pay for the loss in 5 years or 50 years? There is no way to know. The argument also fails to take into account the money that would be spent in buying new equipment for synthetic farming. Unless and until the difference in yield is quite significant, this argument does not hold true.

Finally the spokesperson has tried to label organic farming as a financially unwise decision due to low yield. This is highly questionable. Besides the point that the yield difference may not be significant, it is possible that the market is ready to pay a premium price for organic food. It also does not take into account the adverse effect synthetic farming may have on the soil as it is not environment friendly and hence negatively affect the yield in future. Considering these factors, organic farming may indeed be a better financial decision than synthetic farming.

Concluding, the speech's logical reasoning looks like a sales pitch devoid of any merit or good reasoning. It mentions a study but conveniently forgets to mention the source, ignores costs associated with buying equipment for synthetic farming, brushes asides environmental concerns and ignores the fact that market may be willing to pay more for organic products. No farmer should trust this reasoning on face value to switch to synthetic farming.