LSAT-18-2-21

snow_mountain

21. The West does not escape the effects of its
relationship with the non-Western world. Even as
an individual fails to develop fully without
constant interaction with an equal, a tradition
of thought loses vitality and lacks the capacity
for rigorous self-criticism without the probing
presence of an authentic "other." In the absence
of constant and critical dialogue with other
traditions. Western thought remains parochial,
commonplace, and narrow.
Which one of the following techniques of argument
does the author use in the passage?
(A) identifying a point of similarity between two
different states of affairs
(B) reconciling two opposed sets of circumstances
with each other
(C) identifying a conclusion that has no
supporting argument
(D) deriving a conclusion from a set of
conflicting assumptions
(E) taking advantage of inconsistencies in the
definition of a critical term


答案A。 不明白，请求高人解释，从哪里能看出作者指明 a point of similarity.

cranberry

思想文化和个体在类似情况下的近似

Bensontuo

snow_mountain 发表于 2003-12-5 15:48
21. The West does not escape the effects of itsrelationship with the non-Western world. Even asan in ...

Possibly one of the best questions I have seen here.

The argument simply made a flaw by citing just because the similarities relies in the process of how a characteristic developed shown from A->B is similar to it of C->D, so the reasoning is " qualified " to be comparable.

Individual fails to develop fully without constant interaction with an equal, tradition of thought loses vitality and lacks the capacity for rigorous self-criticism without the probing of an authentic " other ".

In the absence of constant and critical dialogue with other traditions, western thought remains parochial, common place, and narrow.

So what are 2 " state of affairs " here

1. Individual's thoughts ( 個體的故步自封）

2. Western thoughts  （ 整體的剛愎自用）


A. Perfect answer

B. there are no any sets of circumstances opposing each other.

C. It " indeed " does have supporting argument regardless of the fact that whether the supporting document is really supportive or not.

D. It does not have any conflicting assumptions. Means you might need to make 2 necessary assumptions, and one of them is either Mistaken negate or reverse of the other.

E. there is no any inconsistencies here within the argument.