Which reasoning suggests that simply being unable to see something equates to its non-existence?

The correct choice is based on the concept of assuming that something does not exist simply because it is not visible or directly observable, which reflects a flawed reasoning process. Causal oversimplification occurs when complex issues are reduced to overly simplistic explanations, often overlooking important nuances or factors. In the context of visibility and existence, this reasoning embodies the erroneous belief that if one cannot see something, it must not be real or does not exist.

In this case, assuming that invisibility equates to non-existence neglects the possibility of hidden or abstract concepts that may not be seen but are nonetheless real, like thoughts, emotions, or even distant objects in the universe. This oversimplification can lead to a misunderstanding of reality, emphasizing the importance of recognizing that visibility does not determine existence.