bipolarbear wrote:
The interstitial nucleus, a subregion of the brain's hypothalamus, is typically smaller for male cats than for female cats. A neurobiologist perFORMed autopsies on male cats who died from disease X, a disease affecting no more than .05 percent of male cats, and found that these male cats had interstitial nuclei that were as large as those generally found in female cats. Thus, the size of the interstitial nucleus determines whether or not male cats can contract disease X.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) No female cats have been known to contract disease X, which is a subtype of disease Y.
(B) Many male cats who contract disease X also contract disease Z, the cause of which is unknown.
(C) the interstitial nuclei of female cats who contract disease X are larger than those of female cats who do not contract disease X.
(D) Of 1,000 autopsies on male cats who did not contract disease X, 5 revealed interstitial nuclei larger than those of the average male cat.
(E) The hypothalamus is known not to be causally linked to disease Y, and disease X is a subtype of disease Y.
premise: typically, nuc males < nuc females,
premise: study on MALES with X had nuc males ≤ nuc fems;
con: study suggests that nuc males ≤ nuc fems determines whether the can get X.
assum: nuc males ≤ nuc fems = X; what if the inverse was true, X made the nuc males larger? or, what if the sample studied was an anomaly?…
(A) no fems "HAVE BEEN KNOWN" to get X <= this leaves an open possibility that fem cats with nuc similar to males got X, so this doesnt necessarily weaken; also, X could be only contracted by males, thus, this info would be irrelevant;
(B) irrelevant;
(C) again, this talks abt female cats, which leaves open the possibility that X acts differently in males; besides, this could strengthen the argument, suggesting that the size of nuc does determine getting X;
(D) 5 revealed a nuc "LARGER THAN THE AVG MALE" <= notice the comparison between males vs males… the argument's premise refers to nuc MALES vs nuc FEMALES; this might suggest that those 5 males, had a larger nuc than the average, but a smaller nuc than females!
Answer (E): if the hyp is KNOWN (fact) no to be linked to Y/X => then the argument falls, bc the author assumes that the nuc in the hyp determines getting Y/X.