ChaseDream
标题: 一道700-800的逻辑题qwq求救！ [打印本页]
作者: 三磷酸腺苷 时间: 2018-8-23 10:53
标题: 一道700-800的逻辑题qwq求救！
Recently, some critics of the U.S. government have pointed out that this country is the only advanced industrialized nation without a national vaccine laboratory and suggested that this lack makes the American public more vulnerable than other developed nations to infectious diseases, such as avian flu. A government official said these critics were disloyal and thus wrong about the public’s vulnerability. To support his claim, the official cited the generally long life span and low infant mortality of United States citizens, relative to all United Nation member nations. Mentioning the high quality of American hospitals, he added that all of the Europeans that he knew preferred to undergo major medical treatments in the United States rather than in the socialized medical systems in place in their home countries.
All of the following are weaknesses or potential weaknesses in the official’s argument EXCEPT:
A The high quality of hospitals in the United States is not a factor affecting the public’s vulnerability to infectious disease.
B Whether or not the critics are disloyal has no bearing on whether or not they are wrong.
C The Europeans that the official cited are a demographically narrow sample, overwhelmingly composed of wealthy males over the age of fifty.
D The average life span of United States citizens is determined not only by deaths due to infectious diseases but also by deaths due to all other causes.
E Comparing the United States to all United Nations member nations does not address the concern that the U.S. is behind other advanced industrialized nations in a particular way.
作者: 三磷酸腺苷 时间: 2018-8-23 10:53
这道题选A！完全不理解为什么，我做题的时候看到A就给排除了
作者: 三磷酸腺苷 时间: 2018-8-23 10:54
以下是（并没懂的）解析
The official's conclusion is that people who claim that the U.S. is more vulnerable
than other nations because of the country's lack of a national vaccine laboratory
are disloyal and incorrect. His basis for that conclusion is that the U.S. has
generally long life span and low infant mortality relative to all UN countries.
Moreover, he cites the high quality of American hospitals, and he adds that many
people he knows from around the world come to the U.S. for medical care. We
are asked to find the choice that does NOT point out a weakness or potential
weakness in the official's argument.
(A) CORRECT. This choice states that the high quality of hospitals is not a factor
affecting the public's vulnerability to infectious disease. However, the quality of
hospitals very arguably does affect how vulnerable the public is to such disease.
(B) This choice highlights the official's logical jump from "disloyal" to "wrong" in
the phrase "these critics are disloyal and thus wrong about the public's
vulnerability." There is no necessary connection between disloyalty and
wrongness.
(C) If the Europeans that the official cited overwhelmingly consist of wealthy men
over the age of fifty, then the official relied on an unrepresentative sample to
justify his claim. What is true of wealthy older European men is not necessarily
true of Europeans or non-Americans generally.
(D) If the average life span of Americans is determined by causes other than
infectious disease, then the official is not limiting his evidence to cases relating to
vaccines. Other causes of death are not relevant to the critics' argument.
(E) The ranking of the United States relative to all UN countries is misleading,
since it does not compare the U.S. to other "advanced industrialized" or
"developed" nations, as the critics' claim does.
作者: 三磷酸腺苷 时间: 2018-8-23 10:59
official 引用了The high quality of hospitals in the US来support他的argument：那些说public is vulnerable to infectious diseases的人是错的。
那么难道说high quality of hospitals和vulnerability无关不能weaken这个official的观点嘛？
作者: kluivert 时间: 2018-8-24 08:47
看了半天搞不懂.... 自相矛盾的说法
This choice states that the high quality of hospitals is not a factor
affecting the public's vulnerability to infectious disease. However, the quality of
hospitals very arguably does affect how vulnerable the public is to such disease.
A申明高质量的医院不是影响大众易于得传染病的因素....然后所谓答案解释又说这明显是个重要因素啊...
这是对选项的判断了，而不是假如选项为真，会对结论加强/削弱了
这道题在几个论坛上都被删除了，说是漏洞太多了...出处更是不明
Gmatclub : --== Message from GMAT Club Team ==--
This is not a quality discussion. It has been retired.
If you would like to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum. Thank you!
To review the GMAT Club's Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow these links: Quantitative | Verbal Please note - we may remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines. Thank you.
ManhattanPrep:
Hi all,
Strangely enough, just recently there has been a small burst of complaints about this problem, which has caused us to put it under the microscope. Under scrutiny, the problem certainly shows flaws: first of all, the question stem should read "if true," which is a tag-line that the GMAT always puts in such questions (for strengthen/weaken). While small, this tag-line is critical: without it, you are left trying to determine which choices are true and which are false instead of which weaken and which don't. As a result, you wind up having to use outside knowledge to determine which answers are true and which aren't. Specifically, answer choice A requires too much outside information to draw a connection between the quality of hospitals and the public's vulnerability to disease.
We actually pulled the question yesterday for rehab -- before seeing your well-timed post, in fact. Sorry about the issue, and thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Thanks,
Chris
作者: 三磷酸腺苷 时间: 2018-8-24 19:07
谢谢！！！
作者: cycgundam 时间: 2018-8-26 03:32
错题。没有任何正确选项。你可以无视。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |