天山-3-21 - ChaseDream - Powered by Discuz!

Q21:
Driving the steep road to the mountaintop Inca ruins of Machu Picchu is potentially
dangerous and hiking there is difficult. Now the Peruvian government is installing a
cable car that will make access much easier, and hence result in a large increase in
tourism. However, since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the
deterioration of a site, installation of the cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the argument?

A. The daily number of tourists that are expected to take the cable car to Machu
Piccu is smaller than the original resident population of Incas.

B. The construction of the cable car terminal at Machu Picchu will require the use of
potentially damaging heavy machinery at the site.

D. Natural weathering will continue to be a more significant cause of the
deterioration of Machu Picchu than tourist traffic.

E. The cable car will replace the tour buses whose large wheels and corrosive
exhaust at present do significant damage to the site.
Answer:

D天气毁坏的比旅游还严重-->那就应该想办法阻止天气搞破坏，不干缆车的事

此题的结论是由于使用cable car导致游客人数增加而使环境更加恶化.在这个结论中作者想要强调的应该是游客人数增加这一原因是主要因素,所以(A)选项中说游客人数实际上并没有增加反而减少了,正好削弱了题目中的结论.

而(E)选项看似正确,但仔细分析后会发现和原问结论应该是无关的

说下我的理解:根据NN的解题注意事项,削弱题要关注结论的特殊性和具体性,对结论进行削弱!

本题结论:However, since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the
deterioration of a site, installation of the cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins. 前面是原因句,结论关注的是CABLE CAR的运行使用将对遗迹造成损害,正确选项E直接针对此进行削弱.

A说的来参观的人少与原居民与结论中的原因句since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the deterioration of a site,是兼容的(CONSISTENT WITH)

D说的自然风蚀作用一直比游客对遗迹的损害还要大,注意那个CONTINUE,说明这种情况是一直持续存在的,与结论说的由于CABLE CAR使用之后的影响是没有关系的,结论说的体现了一个变化的过程.

选E.结论很重要:installation of the cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.

D.与天气相比,程度不同,但仍然未否认其为破坏RUINS的原因之一.(较弱加强)

我觉得这题的答案都不好。题干的argument是说因为太多的游人会加速site的变坏，所以装cable car会harm the ruins。问哪个选项能削弱这个argument。

E不对。E说cable car取代tour bus，而tour bus现在对site有significant damage。可是这并不能说明cable car就不能harm the ruins啊。

A说和original resident population比也不好。如果和未装cable car以前的number of tourists比人数并不增加就是很好的选项了。但是纵观所有的选项和人数有关的只有A了。

装缆车有害的原因原文说是它会带来很多人导致破坏遗迹.要weaken应该是从原因来weaken啊.

以下是引用felix_zheng在2005-9-22 22:23:00的发言：

选E.结论很重要:installation of the cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.

A.乘缆车的游客比原主名少,但还是对RUINS有影响,无法WEAKEN.

B.加强

C.无关

D.与天气相比,程度不同,但仍然未否认其为破坏RUINS的原因之一.(较弱加强)

E.改善了原来的不足.利于RUINS.

第一句话drving...is potentially dangerous在这里有什么意义？不就为了说明不可能经常开车上去吗？

E即便取代了bus，但是cable是经常甚至天天使用的，说不定真比bus的破坏力大

原文的开始说开车或者爬山都困难，去的人少，现在修缆车，去的人多了，然后有影响

变化的就是人的多少和次数的变化，虽然A也不是非常有说服力，不过还是倾向于选A

首先A错在比较对象是原住民，这和结论是无关的，如果A说有了缆车以后人数比以前的人数减少了，那么是可以削弱的，注意比较对象。

答案推理的方向应该是安装缆车不会毁坏环境，或者不会比不安装缆车更毁坏环境。只有答案E，给出了相对符合的方向，如果不安装缆车，其他的汽车会带来更大的伤害。

题干说 since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the deterioration of a site, installation of a cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.

因为大量的游客会加速破坏环境，所以要weaken的话，没有大量的游客出现就可以weaken

注意到题目说了a cable car 会损坏景点的原因是attract larger numbers of tourists to the mountaintop so that the deterioration of the site would be accelerate.但是题目本身并没有说有cable本身有没有损害到the site.

而E中明确说明原来的tour buses本身就危害到the site,更不用说其带来的tourists了

两者相比，显然还是换了cable car 好些，至少其自身是不会伤害到景点的

以下是引用peterchang在2006-9-24 16:54:00的发言：

我觉得这道题答案应该是A

题干说 since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the deterioration of a site, installation of a cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.

因为大量的游客会加速破坏环境，所以要weaken的话，没有大量的游客出现就可以weaken

The daily number of tourists that are expected to take the cable car to Machu Picchu is smaller than the original resident ~没有大量的游客，所以weaken
The construction of the cable car terminal at Machu Picchu will require the use of potentially damaging heavy machinery at the site.~无关
Machu Picchu is already one of the most popular tourist sites in Peru~绝对无关
Natural weathering will continue to be a more significant cause of the deterioration of Machu Picchu than tourist traffic~风化一直是比游客来往更显注的破坏环境原因，与题目是大量游客-->加速破坏，无关
The cable car will replace the tour buses whose large wheels and corrosive exhaust at present do significant damage to the site.~題干根本沒提到tour buses

我也选了A,对D和你想的一样~~~~~~~但又觉的A中的原住民好像一个无关比较,没有原住民多就意味着游客少吗???好疑惑啊~~

我觉得提干的推理链是人多所以损害大；E说缆车比bus好，这个属于跑题儿。据个例子，董事会上VP甲说今年效益不好是因为牙膏卖得不好，VP乙说今年效益好，因为肥皂卖得不错。我要是CEO我肯定让VP乙闭嘴，人家说牙膏卖得不好，你就要说牙膏阿，干肥皂什么事儿啊。。。这应该是business的思维，不是么？所以我支持A。A相当于说今年牙膏卖得和往年差不多，所以效益不好不能怪牙膏

我觉得是 cable car ==>a large increase in tourism ==>accelerate the deterioration of a site

但是E说 cable car 同时引起另一种破坏方式的减少.从而让加速毁坏产生怀疑。

A 是说cablebus带上来的人占小部分。可是只要有cablebus带上来一哪怕只有个人，造成一个increase in tourism ，那么原来的推理链也就还成立。

原文讲到results in a large increase in tourisms。大量增长的游客已经是事实了，A选项中提出一个反对原文的事实。

D. Natural weathering will continue to be a more significant cause of the deterioration of Machu Picchu than tourist traffic

题目说cable car ==>a large increase in tourism ==>accelerate the deterioration of a site，而D引出他因来消弱结论不是么？

原文：开车对人有危险->造缆车->游客大量增长->加速毁坏遗迹。结论：造缆车肯定会伤害遗迹

E - 缆车会替代现在严重毁坏遗迹的旅游巴士。可是，根据原文，造缆车是出于对人身安全的考虑，没说缆车本身对遗迹的毁坏就一定小啊。

（难道是说，提出了这个论据，对方就一定得再动脑子找个证据证明缆车本身对遗迹的伤害不一定比旅游巴士对遗迹的伤害小？OMG，原来所谓逻辑就是大家来找茬！）

From my point of view, choice A is better than E. Since E just states that cable car can diminish the damage caused by the tour buses, but from the information above we could not know whether damage could be caused by cable car. So it is not a good choice. While on the other hand, choice A states that the population is not large enough to destory the site.

the tour buses whose large wheels and corrosive exhaust at present do significant damage to the site---- significant damage

cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins----- only harm to the ruins.

the "harm" is less serious and is different to damage. plus, the damage is significant. Therefore, the cable car is better than the tour bus.

BTW, the question is asking us to argue that the cable car should instead of the tour bus. Read the question carefully!!!

As long as you could challenge the conclusion of the argument, the answer is right.

The conclusion is "installation of a cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins", so a evidence for "not necessarily result in harm" is sufficient to challenge the argument. You don't have to follow the reasoning line of the original argument--"the tourist polulation"

以下是引用kathleen在2005-7-28 12:37:00的发言：

我也同意选A

而(E)选项看似正确,但仔细分析后会发现和原问结论应该是无关的

请NN们指导

However, since the presence of large numbers of tourists tends to accelerate the deterioration of a site, installation of a cable car is certain to result in harm to the ruins.

可否请NN详细解释一下E项的解释和文、题目中结论所说的恶化原因有什么联系？