ChaseDream

标题: lsat-1-1-10 [打印本页]

作者: snowjing 时间: 2005-9-15 08:22
标题: lsat-1-1-10

lsat-1-1

10. Some people say that the scarcity of food is a function of the finite limits of the earth’s resources, coupled with a relentless rate of population growth. This analysis fails to recognize, however, that much of the world’s agricultural resources are used to feed livestock instead of people. In the United States, for example, almost one-half of the agricultural acreage is devoted to crops fed to livestock. A steer reduces twenty-one pounds of inexpensive grain to one pound of expensive meat. Thus, the scarcity of food is not merely a function of limited resources and population growth.

Which one of the following is an assumption that would allow the conclusion in the argument to be properly drawn?

(A) People prefer eating meat to eating grain.

(B) Meat is twenty-one times more expensive than grain.

(D) More than one-half of the agricultural acreage in the United States is devoted to crops fed to humans.（E）

(E) Growing crops for human consumption on the acreage currently devoted to crops for livestock will yield more food for more people.

请问本题解题思路, 特别是对结论的理解. 谢谢!

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-9-15 8:23:36编辑过]

作者: celina1983 时间: 2005-9-16 23:46

普遍观点:因为资源紧缺和人口膨胀导致了食物不足.但是实际上是因为大量粮食被用来养牲口.肉和粮食比例是1比21.所以结论认为普遍观点是不对的.

以上是对题干的理解,问题问假设,而假设是对题干的加强,是必要条件.结论认为是因为把粮食用来养牲口,而大量的粮食只用来换1/21的肉,太浪费了.可是如果没有E这个假设,就不能说明浪费的食物和人吃的粮食不足之间的关系.所以有了E这个假设结论就可以认为如果把粮食用来给人吃,那么就会缓解食物不足的问题.起了桥梁作用.

不知道我说清楚了没有.

其实其他四个很好就排除了

作者: snowjing 时间: 2005-9-17 00:14

非常清楚, 谢谢celina.

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