Geneticist: Billions of dollars are spent each year on high-profile experiments that attempt to link particular human genes with particular personality traits. Though such experiments seem to promise a new understanding of human nature, they have few practical consequences. Meanwhile, more mundane and practical genetic projects -- for example, those that look for natural ways to make edible plants hardier or more nutritious -- are grossly underfunded. Thus, funding for human gene research should be reduced while funding for other genetic research should be increased. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the geneticist's reasoning? ['Experiments that help prevent malnutrition are more worthwhile than those that help prevent merely undesirable personality traits.', 'Experiments that focus on the genetics of plants are more practical than those that focus on the genetics of human nature.', 'Experiments that get little media attention and are not widely supported by the public are more valuable than are those that get much media coverage and have wide public support.', 'Experiments that have modest but practical goals are more worthwhile than those that have impressive goals but few practical consequences.']