Final answer:
The inquiry deals with the effectiveness of individual or group efforts in collective action problems, where contributions are insufficient to enact change, and arguments lack specific details and evidence. It highlights the impact of too many generalities, insufficient evidence, and emotional reasoning on the efficacy of defenses in societal or environmental issues.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question touches upon the concept of collective action problems, and the difficulties inherent in mounting an effective defense when trying to address large-scale issues, such as social injustice or environmental damage. An ineffective defense in this context suggests that the efforts made by an individual or a group are too minimal to make a significant impact or are not persuasive due to a lack of concrete evidence and specific facts. Oftentimes, this can stem from too many generalities or sloppy associative reasoning. The arguments presented may lack the necessary specificity and detail required to gain traction in the collective consciousness or to persuade others to take action.
The text implies that the weaknesses involve either a diluted representation of the concerns at hand—such as altering the characteristics of a supreme being in theological debates—or an inadequate commitment to addressing systemic issues, such as health and welfare, due to collective action problems. In these cases, individuals may not recognize their shared interests, leading to minimal participation in potential solutions, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of the effort. The text also references the role of emotion over reason, indicating that personal feelings toward an individual can cloud the judgment of their arguments, rendering the defense less effective.