GWD-3-32

Q32:

Newspaper editorial:

In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher.  art of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses.  However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

1. Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.


2. Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.


3. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.


4. Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.


5. The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

我认为此提答案应该是C 我的理解如下:

为了降低犯罪率,禁止有大学教育的囚犯继续再服刑时求学

错, 因为服刑时进修的人放出来后,比较不会在犯罪

假设 因为进修有效降低犯罪行为: B会去进修的人不是已经比较不会犯罪,而是进修矫正了犯罪行为

这道题讨论过，答案是C。

因为argument还有个argument，如果被绕进去的话很容易错选A。

同意C。

经典的LAWYER 排除它因的ASSUMPTION题啊.

(C)

因果型结论：ASSUMPTION的方法包括：A。不是其他原因或可能导致该结果。B。结合因果：或有因有果或无果无因。C。因果没颠倒。D显示因果关系的资料是准确。

在看(A), 取非, 结论还是可能成立，

（Ａ）取非，意思是:不TAKE COURSE 还LIKEL DETER CRIME; 但是如果take course 比dont take course能够在程度上,更加DETER CRIME,结论还是成立.

6楼，A取非后，不读书也可以阻止犯罪，结论－罪犯读书有组于减少犯罪－不成立。你怎么推出结论成立的？－

严重同意６楼的意见选Ｃ，考试时候如果能这么清醒太难了。

（Ａ）取非，意思是:不TAKE COURSE 还LIKEL DETER CRIME; 但是如果take course 比dont take course能够在程度上,更加DETER CRIME,结论还是成立.

换个角度也可以这么理解吧：原文的成立条件是“读书能够阻止犯罪”，于是如果我们对选项取非的时候能直接得到“读书反而不能阻止犯罪”的相反的条件，就属于对的答案之一。

但是Ａ取非得到的是“不读书就。。。怎么怎么了”。不读书怎么了，能说明读书怎么了吗？

类似于说，我爸爸教训我说“小子你读书就一定能成才”，我反驳说“我不读书怎么了，人家张小毛没读书也做生意成才了”。