新prep 80 之前木有人讨论过！！！

clumsy123

Inmany scientific disciplines, scientists generally do not do highly creativework beyond the age of forty, a tendency that has normally been taken to showthat aging carries with it a loss of creative capacity.  However, by the age of forty most scientistshave been working in their chosen field for at least fifteen years, so analternative explanation is that spending too long in a single field reduces theopportunity for creative thought.
Investigatingwhich of the following would be most useful in choosing between the competingexplanations described above?
A.    Whether among those scientists who do highly creative work beyondage forty a large proportion entered their field at a considerably later agethan is common
B. Whetherscientists' choice of research projects tends to be influenced by their ownbelief that their most creative work will be done relatively early in theircareer
C.Whether scientists who are older than forty tend to find more satisfaction inother activities, such as teaching and mentoring, than they do in pursuingtheir own research
D.Whether funding agencies are more inclined to award research grants toscientists who are veterans in their field than to scientists who are relativenewcomers
E. Whether there issignificant variation among scientific fields in the average age at whichscientists working in those fields are at their most productive



在CD上看到很多变体，但是讨论这一题的很少，要不就是没人回答！
我的疑问就是选A，如果回答是的话，可以支持第二个argument，说明创新能力和年龄无关
但如果回答否的话呢，貌似对这2个argument起不到任何作用啊！！
有没有人可以帮忙解释解释呢，跪谢！！！

clumsy123

求SDCAR出现！！！

dengts

If you negate A,you can weaken the conclusion because if those scientist entered their field at a common age,they will spend longer time in a single field

clumsy123

If you negate A,you can weaken the conclusion because if those scientist entered their field at a common age,they will spend longer time in a single field

-- by 会员 dengts (2011/4/7 23:55:59)

额，还是不太明白T T虽然negate A，可以得出这些科学家进入这个领域的时间相对更长了，但并没有说明他们的创新能力下降了呀！

sdcar2010

There are two opinions here regarding the reason why scientists generally do not do highly creativework beyond the age of forty:
1) Aging carries with it a loss of creative capacity.
2) Spending too long in a single field reduces theopportunity for creative thought.

You are asked to find one experiment to prove which of the two explanations is right.

Choice A is the correct one.

A asks "Whether among those scientists who do highly creative work beyond age forty, a large proportion entered their field at a considerably later agethan is common?"

If the answer is YES, then the second explanation gains credibility since it supports the notion that creativity does not lose among older people and the notion that a key to creativity is not to spend too long in one field.

If the anwer is NO, then the second explanation lost credibility since there is no relationship between starting late and booming late.

dengts

If you negate A,you can weaken the conclusion because if those scientist entered their field at a common age,they will spend longer time in a single field

-- by 会员 dengts (2011/4/7 23:55:59)

额，还是不太明白T T虽然negate A，可以得出这些科学家进入这个领域的时间相对更长了，但并没有说明他们的创新能力下降了呀！

-- by 会员 clumsy123 (2011/4/8 0:01:46)

The last sentense tells us that spending too long in a single field reduces innovation.If we have "Some scientist  spending longer in a single field still DO highly creative work beyond age",we can weaken the conclusion.

clumsy123

There are two opinions here regarding the reason why scientists generally do not do highly creativework beyond the age of forty:
1) Aging carries with it a loss of creative capacity.
2) Spending too long in a single field reduces theopportunity for creative thought.

You are asked to find one experiment to prove which of the two explanations is right.

Choice A is the correct one.

A asks "Whether among those scientists who do highly creative work beyond age forty, a large proportion entered their field at a considerably later agethan is common?"

If the answer is YES, then the second explanation gains credibility since it supports the notion that creativity does not lose among older people and the notion that a key to creativity is not to spend too long in one field.

If the anwer is NO, then the second explanation lost credibility since there is no relationship between starting late and booming late.

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/4/8 0:36:19)

If the anwer is NO, then the second explanation lost credibility since there is no relationship between starting late and booming late.


but, it still can not prove that scientists will lose creative abilities over 40. It just weakens the second argument.

sdcar2010

You do not need to prove it. "Investigatingwhich of the following would be most useful in choosing between the competingexplanations described above?"

You just pick the one that is more credible.

clumsy123

You do not need to prove it. "Investigatingwhich of the following would be most useful in choosing between the competingexplanations described above?"

You just pick the one that is more credible.

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/4/8 12:08:10)

那你可以不可以帮忙解释解释B为啥不对呢？

sdcar2010

What one believes in has nothing to do with what one is able to accomplish.