sakshamgmat
I have a doubt here.
We could also interpret option C as Physics PG students moving to Comp and Prog as a result of low budget for science research and thus an alternative to Physics career.
Then how does C weaken the argument ?
Also,A option suggests that more people would choose Physics at an undergraduate level which weakens the premise: fewer students are choosing a career in Physics and weakens the conclusion that the number of PG students will decline.
Can you please elaborate ?
Once again a typical GMAT-like structure - please refer to the post below:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-marriage-c ... l#p1807654Here X: budget cut.
Y: students not opting for physics.
The conclusion here is that budget cut causes not opting for physics. (X causes Y)
Option C indicates that students are moving out of physics department (
,and because of low number of students, the budget cut is implemented.) (Y causes X)
The part is blue is not explicitly stated in option C, but in the real GMAT, you may expect an explicit relation stated between X and Y.
Option A is wrong because it deals only with the conclusion. The correct answer must attack the LINK between the premise and conclusion (i.e. the argument) and not the conclusion in isolation. If you examine option A, you would realize that it has no bearing with the premise of the argument.