Hi SS3003,You've spotted the exact word that trips everyone up on
D: "the argument
seeks to weigh against."
Your instinct is right about one thing: the argument never
disputes that the seeds are expensive. In fact, it fully accepts it. So if "weigh against" meant "prove false" or "deny," then D really would be wrong.
But "weigh against" doesn't mean "refute." It means the author places that consideration on one side of a scale, and then pushes back against the
direction it pulls in - using something on the other side of the scale.
Look at what the cost point pulls toward: if seeds are expensive and don't pay off for most farmers, then the natural implication is
"so these seeds probably won't catch on." That pull runs
against the author's conclusion, which is
"their use is likely to become widespread."So the author isn't arguing the seeds are cheap. The author concedes the cost, then answers it with the rising-demand point (the second boldface) to reach a conclusion in the
opposite direction. That is exactly what "weighs against" it. This is the same point Karishma made later in the thread: the argument weighs against the
implication of the first boldface, not against its facts.
A tiny stand-in to lock it in:"This restaurant is really expensive. But the food is incredible - so I'll keep eating there."I never deny the place is expensive. I accept it, and then I
weigh against the pull of that cost (which would push me to stop going) using the quality point. That's precisely the move in D's first boldface.
Answer: DSS3003
For Option D - how would the first part be right - the Argument does not weigh against the outcome that using these gentically modified seeds will be expensive?