Question Type:
Match the Flaw
Stimulus Breakdown:
Personality and genes are linked. Genes can't change. Therefore, you can't change.
Answer Anticipation:
This argument commits a Comparison flaw. Just because two things are linked doesn't mean they share all relevant features. Also, the language here is all correlative, so expect some causal language in incorrect answers.
Correct answer:
(A)
Answer choice analysis:
(A) Bam, right off the bat. I'd definitely leave this on the first pass without selecting it, though (my general strategy for MtF questions). Ultimately, though, this matches perfectly. The answer has two things linked ("related to"), and one of the things not changing is used to prove the other can't. Same flaw, so this is our answer.
(B) Valid argument. The weakness of this conclusion ("could result") means that it can be validly drawn from the premises given. Also, the conclusion is the inverse of the conclusion in the stimulus. And, as expected, there's some mismatched causal language.
(C) Again, there's causal language that doesn't match up. This answer makes an unwarranted assumption towards the ability to do something.
(D) More causal language! This argument also commits a temporal flaw, assuming that exercise works on a spectrum, instead of only providing benefits after a certain amount of investment.
(E) More causality. This answer choice also assumes that the relationship is positive (if one is high, so is the other) instead of negative (if one is low, the other is high).
Takeaway/Pattern: Sometimes noting that a specific type of language isn't in an argument can lead to easier eliminations.
#officialexplanation