201.
State spokesperson: Many businesspeople who have not been to our state believe that we have an inadequate road system. Those people are mistaken, as is obvious from the fact that in each of the past six years, our state has spent more money per mile on road improvements than any other state.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the reasoning in the spokesperson’s argument?
(A) In the spokesperson’s state, spending on road improvements has been increasing more slowly over the past six years than it has in several other states.
(B) Adequacy of a state’s road system is generally less important to a businessperson considering doing business there than is the availability of qualified employees.
(C) Over the past six years, numerous businesses have business have moved into the state.
(D) In general, the number of miles of road in a state’ road system depends on both the area and the population of the state.
(E) Only states with seriously inadequate road systems need to spend large amounts of money on road improvements.
A并不能削弱啊，因为increasing slowly不能削弱，expenditure比人家州高，就能支撑这个州的道路系统不坏
E说，过去六年投入大，就是因为这个州的道路不好
其实D也有点绕的，如果D说这个州的路里数比人家州多，也能削弱，因为这样的话平均的每里的费用并不高。可惜选项欲言又止。
reason是支持观点的原因
the reasoning n.推理, 评理, 论证，指的是论证的过程
发言人整个的论证过程：因为六年来偶们每年花在每公里路维护上的银子比别的州都要多，因此有些商人认为偶们州的公路系统不充足的论断是错的。削弱的方向是“花钱多但公路不完善”，而E正是承认发言人所说的花钱多这个理由（因为这是事实），但运用了这个事实所代表的另一方面来反驳发言人的观点。
另外，虽然A说公路维护费用的增长速度比其它州慢，但对结论“公路系统完善”这一观点没作用。有可能公路本来就挺好，维护它不需要花什么钱，增长速度当然慢；也有可能公路不好，维护它又舍不得花银子，那么就削弱结论了。
罗嗦一大堆，不晓得说清楚了没有
我觉得这道题的关键是：注意结论的具体性和特殊性，这道题的主题是：费用和公路的完善性。选现中一定要出现相关的内容。
在A中只有费用，没有公路的完善性
在D 中也是一样的
3位NN的解释真棒，赞一个！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |