ChaseDream

标题: GWD 29-9，请教 [打印本页]
作者: ershao    时间: 2005-12-25 21:20
标题: GWD 29-9，请教

Q9:


Manatees, aquatic mammals inhabiting Florida’s rivers and coastal waters, swim close to the surface and are frequently killed in collisions with boats.  To address the problem, boat traffic in manatee-populated waters is being required to maintain very low speeds.  Unfortunately, manatees are unable to hear low-pitched sounds and a boat’s sound lowers in pitch as the boat slows.  Therefore, this approach may in fact make things worse rather than better.



Which of the following, if true, casts most doubt on the conclusion?




  • The areas where boats would have to maintain low speeds were decided partly on the basis of manatee-population estimates and partly from numbers of reported collisions between manatees and boats.

  • Because the water hyacinth that manatees feed on grows best in water that is nearly still, water hyacinth beds can be disturbed or damaged by fast-moving boat traffic.

  • Over the last several decades, boat traffic in Florida’s coastal waters has been increasing almost continuously and now represents the greatest threat to the endangered manatee population.

  • The sound of a boat engine generally travels much further under water than it does through the air.

  • When experimenters exposed manatees to the recorded sounds of boats moving at various speeds, the creatures were unable to discern the sounds over normal background noise.

    • 答案给E


    我认为B更好，降低船速可提高hyacinth的存活, 从而有利于manatee的存活. 因此降低船速还是有用的........


    NN帮忙看看,谢谢！！！！

    作者: colleen    时间: 2005-12-26 13:09
    E is right. According to E, manatees were unable to discern the sound over normal backgroud noise. It implies manatees are able to discern the sound above the normal background noise. So if the boat speeds fast, the boat sound higher in pitch, then manatees can hear it.
    作者: 五大老    时间: 2006-3-9 21:20
    我也选的B，不太明白E的意思，能不能用中文解释一下E
    作者: shanexin    时间: 2006-5-20 11:47
    以下是引用colleen在2005-12-26 13:09:00的发言：
    E is right. According to E, manatees were unable to discern the sound over normal backgroud noise. It implies manatees are able to discern the sound above the normal background noise. So if the boat speeds fast, the boat sound higher in pitch, then manatees can hear it.

    I don't think so. That manatees were unable to discern the sound over nomral background noise doesn't mean manatee are able to discern the sound above the normal background noise, which is false dilemma, black or white fallacy. In addition, the premise of the recognization of the sound is provided in the context.

    作者: josephhan001    时间: 2006-5-20 13:39

    选项E：Manatees不能在正常噪音背景的情况下区分不同速度的船只的声音。

    证明题目中前提和结论无关，直接削弱结论。

    选项B出现了题目里没有出现的因素the water hyacinth , 虽然也有削弱结论的作用，但是属于间接削弱结论。

    因此要选直接削弱结论的E。

    作者: rosierosie    时间: 2006-5-30 21:56

    还是不明白!

    原文说的是让船放慢速度以保护M,但是因为M听不到放慢速度的船的更低音调的声音，所以计划会使情况变坏而不使变好。

    那跟E中的 various speeds有什么关系？而且这里的background sound又使指的什么那?

    作者: shzzhengfan    时间: 2006-5-30 23:39

    原文的结论是：这个方法会使情况变得更糟。削弱：没有使情况变得更糟。

    原文的推理是：船速降低后，音调变小，所以动物听不见了（船快的时候能听见），所以更容易撞船了，因此情况变更糟了。

    E说，船在各个速度下，这动物其实根本分不出船的声音和其他声音（可以理解为这动物就是聋的），所以船快船慢，这动物被船撞得几率是一样的，因此就不能说这个计划使情况变糟了。

    不知说清楚没？

    作者: titatita    时间: 2006-6-9 11:15

    还是不太明白e为什么对

    仍然支持b


    [此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-9 11:16:26编辑过]
    作者: wycg    时间: 2006-6-10 16:05
    以下是引用titatita在2006-6-9 11:15:00的发言：

    还是不太明白e为什么对

    仍然支持b


    7楼和5楼的战友说的是对的.B虽然有道理,可是它和文章说的推理无关.关于E,同意7楼的解释.

    作者: titatita    时间: 2006-6-12 14:25

    我明白了

    如果没有e,b就是最好的答案.他因削弱

    题目问措施使局面变得比以前更糟,只要选一个不会变的更糟的情况就行.

    e说在背景噪音下,m什么声音都分辨不出.也就是说措施前,措施后没有任何变化.直接说措施不可行.直接针对原文前提,结论及推理过程.

    b没有针对措施本身的问题.而说m的食物在新措施下更好.但仍然缺乏其他assumption.如果原来食物不够,现在够了,说明局面不会变得遭,但如果原来食物就过剩,现在更过剩,对m的生存不会产生任何影响.所以b不能选.

    作者: 梦不落    时间: 2006-6-12 16:24

    b不算他因削弱吧？应该是无关。文中说得problem是如何避免这种生物frequently killed in collision with boats，而不是别的什么导致它们死亡的原因。E直接削弱。就算B的意思是说有别的原因使生物死亡，那也不是frequently killed in collision with boats.充其量是个缓慢死亡的解释。


    [此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-12 16:25:58编辑过]
    作者: babypigsxm    时间: 2006-8-12 20:47

    UP

    作者: ProteinMonica    时间: 2006-8-16 20:56
    注意B有fast-moving，那么如果船放慢速度，就不能算fast moving，所以无关
    作者: gmat30    时间: 2006-12-7 11:55

    shzzhengfan解释得太好了！！！

    作者: hedge    时间: 2006-12-8 14:10

    我也错了

    作者: heshaohua666    时间: 2006-12-12 16:20
    梦不落,同意
    作者: woyuhong    时间: 2007-10-17 13:04
    up
    作者: szy733    时间: 2009-2-13 15:16
    up
    作者: suzy2728    时间: 2009-8-31 20:50

    起初不明白，坚持选B。因为觉得B这个选项很符合传统逻辑题目的削弱

    但是现在反过来想，题目说的是高速撞死M，所以要慢些

    而B选项说高速也撞死了M的食物H，在没法不撞死M的情况下把它的食物也撞飞了，太残忍了

    但是回想一下，高速是一直的事情，撞死M也是一直的事情，这么着撞死H也是一直的事情

    可是这些年来M都没绝种啊，还活得多多的啊，只是GOV嫌它还不够多罢了

    证明高速跟H的关系不足以说明这件慢速事情的效果

    作者: 云游    时间: 2013-9-11 21:10
    suzy2728 发表于 2009-8-31 20:50
    起初不明白，坚持选B。因为觉得B这个选项很符合传统逻辑题目的削弱但是现在反过来想，题目说的是高速撞死M ...

    I still consider E weird, should not a premise in the stimulus be accepted as is written? E seems to directly cast doubt on the premise?!
    作者: 云游    时间: 2013-9-11 21:20
    云游 发表于 2013-9-11 21:10
    I still consider E weird, should not a premise in the stimulus be accepted as is written? E seems  ...

    Well I see, E does not undermine premise it just point out an neglected premise:

    Premise: M can't hear low-pitched voice
    E: M can't hear high-pitched voice, either.

    Since E has proved that whether M can hear the boat is not related to M's possibility of hitting the boat, the conclusion can be very well drawn.
    作者: Kya    时间: 2013-10-1 17:05
    同意楼上，应该就是一个断桥的思路，B选项有out of scope的嫌疑，只是说了不reduce spped(which已经执行的方案)可能有的好处，但是没有直接攻击到逻辑链： 声音小，听不到-----be killed more
    严重点说，貌似反驳了前提。。。。。
    个人见解。。求拍砖探讨
    作者: bbmaker    时间: 2013-10-19 19:41
    还是中文解释能看明白
    作者: gar_bbbbb    时间: 2017-9-13 10:37
    请问这道题分类算是什么TAT，好纠结啊。



    欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3