ChaseDream

标题: 是否削弱文章前提 [打印本页]

作者: 一二一 时间: 2016-7-17 10:37
标题: 是否削弱文章前提

The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the freewheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train

will not exist.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high speed train’s stations would be. C

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

这道题的正确答案是C

但仔细分析下来C不是在否定文章中已给的信息吗？文章中认为aircraft是 free-wheel system 但是C选项又说Planes are not a free-wheel system

对于A选项说明train的另外一个优点 guided mechanically优于plane 为什么不能作为一个干扰因素说明train有存在的必要呢？

作者: 点点小允 时间: 2016-7-17 10:54
fly anywhere这种论述没有实际考虑airport的存在，所以airplane不是完全意义上的freewheel.即不能与bus类比
至于a选项，因为market是从customer demand side而言的，而guided mechanically方便的是司机而不是customers

作者: 一二一 时间: 2016-7-17 21:29

点点小允发表于 2016-7-17 10:54
fly anywhere这种论述没有实际考虑airport的存在，所以airplane不是完全意义上的freewheel.即不能与bus类比 ...

恩恩~懂了！谢谢

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)