The argument that best supports Chief Justice Taney’s decision is:
Society benefits more from the intellectual pursuits of the individual and must seek ways to reward the inventors.
This aligns with Taney's reasoning that granting broad protections to original patents stifles further invention and improvement, which is contrary to public policy and the overall progress of invention. Taney implies that while the rights of inventors must be respected, it is also important not to inhibit the advancement of technology and ideas that benefit society as a whole.