ChaseDream

标题: Og 16 CR 40，从何理解og的解释，求指点一下。【已解决】 [打印本页]

作者: iamluluhaha 时间: 2016-11-11 12:22
标题: Og 16 CR 40，从何理解og的解释，求指点一下。【已解决】
希望大家先做一下这道题，再看答案。

If the county continues to collect residential trash at current levels, landfills will soon be overflowing and parkland will need to be used in order to create more space. Charging each household a fee for each pound of trash it puts out for collection will induce residents to reduce the amount of trash they create; this charge will therefore protect the remaining county parkland.
Which of the following is an assumption made in drawing the conclusion above?
(A) Residents will reduce the amount of trash they put out for collection by reducing the number of products they buy.
(B) The collection fee will not significantly affect the purchasing power of most residents, even if their households do not reduce the amount of trash they put out.
(C) The collection fee will not induce residents to dump their trash in the parklands illegally.
(D) The beauty of county parkland is an important issue for most of the county’s residents.
(E) Landfills outside the county’s borders could be used as dumping sites for the county’s trash.

答案是选C，我在A和C里徘徊了很久。看了OG的解释也没有真正理解。求大家指点一下，如何来根据og的思维来解决这道题，感谢?

解释如下：

                                                                                             Argument Construction

                                                                                                                                                                     Situation

Landfills will overflow and parkland will have to be used instead if current trash collection levels continue. Charging fees per pound of trash collected will inhibit trash growth and protect parkland.

                                                                                                                                                                     Reasoning

What assumption underlies the conclusion? The assumption will be a statement that has to be true in order for the argument’s premises to provide a solid reason for believing its conclusion. To reach the conclusion that the plan will protect the parkland, the argument must assume that county residents will comply with the new fee, reducing both the trash they generate and the need to convert parkland to landfills. It is assumed that residents will not resort to some illegal means of avoiding the new fee, and it is certainly assumed that they will not contribute to the destruction of parklands by dumping trash in them illegally.

A Even though the fee may indirectly have this effect, the argument need not assume that it will; perhaps residents will continue to buy as much, but will make longer use of the product, or recycle it.
B The argument would be stronger if this were assumed NOT to be true.
C Correct. This statement properly identifies the fact that the argument rests on the assumption that the fee will not create illegal dumping.
D The argument need not assume this, and nothing in the argument indicates that it does. Financial incentives could be enough to make the desired outcome happen even if residents are indifferent to the parkland’s beauty.
E The argument assumes that residents will reduce the amount of trash that they create, not that they will find other places to dispose of it.

作者: iamluluhaha 时间: 2016-11-11 14:52
求哪位小伙伴可以帮忙解析一下啊，真的感激不尽！

作者: Bradz 时间: 2016-11-14 18:23
assumption的问题，可以试着推翻选项，看看可不可以推翻结论。

A里面的假设，就是居民会通过减少购买来减少垃圾。推翻它，即居民不会通过减少购买来减少垃圾，也不影响垃圾处理费会带来的好处。

C里面的假设，就是居民不会偷偷丢弃垃圾。推翻它，即居民会偷偷丢弃垃圾，那么虽然合法回收的垃圾少了，但是非法破坏环境的多了，那么垃圾处理费不就没用了。

作者: iamluluhaha 时间: 2016-11-15 11:38

Bradz 发表于 2016-11-14 02:23
assumption的问题，可以试着推翻选项，看看可不可以推翻结论。

A里面的假设，就是居民会通过减少购买来减 ...

谢谢你！明白啦～

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