If a geneticist selects any arbitrary group of people for

B for me too..

Argument says Similar genes not necessarily reason for liking football.

Could be used effectively against an argument which says that people who share an activity and gene structure do so because the activity has something to do with the gene structure.

its B..



this is best against option B...comon gene leads conclusion to alcoholism is genetically determined.. bt author is saying agains that..not all genetically same ppl will like football

Bumping for review and further discussion*.

New project from GMAT Club! Click here

Convinced with the answer choice B. But can someone explain why choice D is wrong? It also talks about genetic relation in personality development.

Good question. Let’s take a quick look at the potential arguments with weakening statements for both B and D.

Argument B
Genetic link found for alcoholics - therefore alcoholism is genetically caused

Weakening (from stem)
Any group can be linked genetically even though the marker may have no relevance

[Direct, strong weakening of argument]


Argument D
Genes may determine environmental responses, therefore scientists can’t say that heredity doesn’t impact personality

Weakening (from stem)
Any group can be linked genetically even though the marker may have no relevance

[Indirect, minor potential weakening]

Even though the statement from the stem does work against the Argument, the connection isn’t very strong. The potential argument is so broad and the weakening statement provides a very specific counterpoint. With the argument stating that scientists can’t rule out genetics when thinking about personality, providing a counterpoint about genetic links for football watchers would not give scientists license to ignore heredity impacts on personality.

This is a good example of what happens with CR answer choices. You will often find 2 relevant answer choices and you have to determine which one is best (the question states: The consideration above can BEST serve…).

KW

Good question

Conclusion :-But that shared marker need not have anything to do with the fact that they all like football.

to weaken this we need to prove shared marker plays some roll in determining characteristics, B says,"The discovery that alcoholics share a common gene establishes that alcoholism is genetically determined." (weakening the conclusion)

So correct!!

Hope that helps

I would rephrase the sentence "If a geneticist selects any arbitrary group of people—for instance, those who enjoy watching football games—and examines them closely enough, he or she may well find a genetic marker common to all of them"

as

"if you look at people who love watching football, you will discover that they all have one head. Therefore, having one head makes you love football."

Option B follows the same silly way of reasoning.

If the argument stated that scientists have discovered a gene that all alcoholics have and that all non-alcoholics don't have, then it would be an extremely compelling argument. But it doesn't do that.

B is the answer as it draws a direct connection with the paragraph. A is true but that does not mean that B is also true. So in option B, Alocholics may have common genes but that does not mean that people only with that kinds of genes become alcoholic.