ChaseDream

标题: GWD-30-Q19第一次讨论 [打印本页]
作者: rosmarine    时间: 2006-6-3 13:53
标题: GWD-30-Q19第一次讨论

    

GWD-30-Q19




    

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people
in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.  Since, even after treatment, people who have
had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have
drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of
accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem
from holding a safety-sensitive job.


    

 


    

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines
the argument above?


    

 


    
  1. Some companies place
         employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential
         programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave.
  2. Many accidents in the
         workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold
         safety-sensitive jobs.
  3. Workers who would
         permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking
         problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as
         long as possible.
  4. People who hold
         safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any
         personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
  5. Some industrial accidents
         are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.


答案C。我用排除法得到C，其他选项明显无关。但是我觉得C的逻辑很怪异。C说有酗酒问题的人会隐瞒自己的酗酒问题，当然，这样做确实能使雇主的策略落空，但是，这并不能推翻雇主的逻辑呀。如果问题问的是下面哪个答案能使雇主的策略ineffective，那么肯定是C了。可现在，明显驴唇不对马嘴。
作者: jandjshi    时间: 2006-6-3 15:08

我倾向D. 但有可能我脑子糊涂. 睡一觉了再看.

作者: wycg    时间: 2006-6-3 15:18

这道题上周有过讨论的.可能是重题不重号.

mm在GWD搜一下记下题号,在CR区里搜.

作者: rosmarine    时间: 2006-6-3 15:50
啊，重题不重号，我在jinni的CR分类里搜了一遍，就GWD30-19一个啊。
作者: jandjshi    时间: 2006-6-4 00:59

睡醒了. 支持C.

workers would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment try instead to conceal their problem. 就是说这个ban导致了worker不去医治. 本来没这个ban, workers就直接去sought treatment了.

作者: babypigsxm    时间: 2006-8-12 18:49
B为什么错呢？
作者: mbz    时间: 2006-8-13 09:04

B)Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.

B is wrong b/c it has nothing to do with the argument that anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem should not be hired for a safety-sensitive job.

作者: superPPDD    时间: 2006-8-13 14:42

感觉D像因果倒置

是不是因为它没有针对结论

作者: homecloud    时间: 2006-8-21 16:49

我就是感觉D像因果倒置, 才选了他.

作者: gonghao    时间: 2006-8-21 17:03

D有先后的问题

D的说法，是先到了职位，再恶化平行，导致了。

文章是说ban那些治疗过的人

文章的内容已经是D之后的东西了，即使D是成立的也不weaken结论本身。

即治疗过的人应该被ban

作者: lxzjojo    时间: 2006-12-14 20:24

明白鸟。。。之前一看答案是C想了老半天不明白为啥D不对，原来是不懂那个exacerbate的意思，自己想当然以为它是减轻的意思。。。：P

C说那些有酗酒习惯的家伙因为知道雇主会不起用曾治疗过的人，害怕会丢掉工作所以一直设法隐瞒自己酗酒的事情，也自然不会去张扬去获取应有的治疗啦，所以雇主只是去bar那些曾被治疗过的人当然不足够啦，还有很多是酗酒而雇主根本不知道的人。。。如果雇主不去bar这班人的话，他们就去治疗啦，事故会降低，所以weaken啦！


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-12-14 20:35:49编辑过]
作者: qincong83    时间: 2007-7-16 23:02

1.         GWD-30-Q19
                      B C

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.  Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar禁止 anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

当人们从事安全系数低的工作并有酗酒习惯时，工业事故发生率高。因为就算治疗后，酗酒过的人比其他人未来更容易有酗酒问题。任何想降低事故率的雇主应避免雇用曾因从事安全系数低工作并曾有酗酒问题的人。

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?即雇主的做法是错的

 

  1. Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave. 公司给酗酒员工休假（和因酗酒就解雇的推理无关）
  2. Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.（与酗酒无关了，我之前咋选的啊～～）
  3. Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.

如果寻求酗酒治疗，就会把自己酗酒的经历曝光会有解雇的危险。因此那些将失业的工人选择隐瞒酗酒问题，能工作多久就多久。

=》
        雇主一味从酗酒就解雇工人角度思考是不对的。因为很多工人隐瞒了，雇主这样做没有效果。

  1. People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems. 从事危险工作的工人会因压力过大加剧个人问题的严重程度，比如酗酒。（和雇主决定是否正确无关）
  2. Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.（事故发生原因，更无关。）

粗略翻译的，没求太精准。大概意思写出来了，希望大家能看懂～呵呵

作者: 小雪猫    时间: 2007-7-30 05:45
?
作者: wgaggassi34    时间: 2007-9-28 21:41
C!
作者: uk_xisherrya    时间: 2007-9-29 12:30
我倒觉得D看起来像在support
作者: ookkla    时间: 2007-12-16 18:02

麻煩大家幫我看看我的思路是不是對的

 

答案C:

因為如果worker隱藏了他們酗酒的事實，會weaken了employer的目標

To reduce the risk of accidents

 

而我一開始選的答案是D:

D是weaken了(酗酒是造成sensitive jobs accident的原因)這件事

 

可以這樣理解嗎??

看到D選項一直浮現她是因果倒置….

作者: cyyp    时间: 2008-10-30 12:17
原来一时糊涂,选的D,现在仔细想想,D还有点support的意味,既然做这些危险工种会加剧病情,当然应该禁止这些人做拉!12楼的解释很清楚了.
作者: newjoshkao    时间: 2009-4-8 16:37

1.        GWD-30-Q19

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.  Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

 

工作意外：

从事安全敏感工作的人有酗酒问题的＞没有酗酒问题的人

 

即使在治疗之后，未来再次酗酒的问题：

曾经有过酗酒问题者＞没有的人

 

雇主避免雇用曾经有酗酒问题的人来从事安全敏感的工作à降低工作意外的风险

 

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

 

  1. Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave.无关本论

  2. Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.　非安全敏感的工作，非本论之范围

  3. Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible.（前提的作法会导致结论变相反）

  4. People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate 使加重、恶化any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.　支持结论

  5. Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.　无关本论之比较

作者: xiaoniuren    时间: 2009-7-20 01:31
DDDD
作者: amberdeng    时间: 2010-2-24 18:04
up



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