I eliminated (D) thinking that I do not need to know the purpose. However, but the thing is that if ppl with similar genes change their inclinations with the purpose, then it means that the inclinations are not necessarily the effect of genetic origin.

Stimulus states [disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues ↔ acceptable to vote the candidate who have different opinion on at least issue important from K’s ]

Above stimulus applies to those who differ from K's opinion. It is saying acceptable to vote for that candidate. M shares opinion thus not belongs to this relationship. We don't know whether K is acceptable to vote for M or not since it is not mentioned when to vote for a candidate who shares an opinion with K. Hence, the only thing we can infer is about L and N.

The editorial’s argument made a typical flaw. This is a typical flaw saying A → C, Not A.

I know that if A, it is C but I don't know what might cause ~ A. There might be many reasons for not doing A.

Hey there. Indeed, the passage stated, "limited capacity to regenerate raw material". However, 16(A) is stating about the speed. We do not know about the speed of depletion and replacement : ) I hope this will help.

@jyarmo54 @cal270356 Thank you! Finally I am getting the hang of these kinds of question lol

@cal270356 said:

For Point at Issue in which our two characters disagree, we want our answer choice to be one to which one person would say, "YES!" and the other would say, "NO!" In other words, we want our characters to have starkly opposite reactions to the answer choice.

Answer choice D does just that. Character A (the moralist) would fully agree. In fact, the answer choice is just reiterating his argument, essentially. Character B (the host) would disagree, screaming "NO" if he heard that answer choice. He is unsure as to whether there is a moral decline in the first place--and if there is one, it isn't due to TV. In other words, TV is not a cause of moral decline. So D's our answer.

As for how much to assume, I don't really think you need to assume anything to solve this question. For Point at Issue, you want to stay really rooted in the text and focus on the exact words of both characters, as well as their main conclusions

Then do I have to ignore the part “by inviting guests”? I am bothered by that qualification...

@beyondsudi482 Thanks! This helped me a lot : )

Thanks! Now I understand what it means clearly.