ChaseDream

标题: L2004-12-4-21 [打印本页]

作者: zindan 时间: 2006-9-21 11:32
标题: L2004-12-4-21

21. Etiquette firmly opposes both obscene and malicious talk, but this does not imply that speech needs to be restricted by law. Etiquette does not necessarily even oppose the expression of offensive ideas. Rather, it dictates that there are situations in which the expression of potentially offensive, disturbing, or controversial ideas is inappropriate and that, where appropriate, the expression and discussion of such ideas is to be done in a civil manner.

Which one of the following judgments most closely corresponds to the principles of etiquette stated above?

(A) Neighbors should not be gruff or unfriendly to one another when they meet on the street.
(B) When prosecutors elicit testimony from a cooperative witness they should do so without intensive questioning.
(C) There should be restrictions on speech only if a large majority of the population finds the speech offensive and hateful.
(D) The journalists at a news conference should not ask a politician potentially embarrassing questions about a controversial policy issue.
(E) The moderator of a panel discussion of a divisive moral issue should not allow participants to engage in name-calling.

答案为(E)请问如何来理解这个(e),其如何与文章对应了?谢谢

作者: nidm 时间: 2006-9-21 13:34
题干:
Etiquette 反对both obscene and malicious talk,但是NOT imply that speech(both obscene and malicious talk) restricted by law. ----- Etiquette反对TALK, 但是不认为TALK违法.
Rather, it(Etiquette) dictates that 在某种情况下, expression of ..(same as TALK above)是不合适的, 应该采用 a civil manner.

E) The moderator of a panel discussion (某种情况下), not allow .. name-calling -- expression of offensive.

作者: nidm 时间: 2006-9-21 13:39
我说不清为什么A和D不对.
A) gruff or unfriendly 好象不太复合expression of potentially offensive, disturbing, or controversial ideas的定义
D) 我只是加入了自己的感觉(不应该在LSAT中发生的.

) ,觉得好象很正常.

BC是明显不对的.

作者: zindan 时间: 2006-9-22 01:48
恩啊,我也是困惑于(d),以及不能当时肯定name-calling是否是一种expression of offensive

作者: fredshen 时间: 2006-9-22 11:02

Very wordy. Really the key is apporiate and civic manner. Come to think about isnt this what "Etiquette" about, lower one's voice in the library, eat quitely in the public.

Only E fits.

A is wrong becuase unfriedness between neighbor on the street dont seem to be either inapporiate or uncivic.

D is wrong because asking hard question is Jounalist's job, it's not inapporaite.

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-22 11:30:58编辑过]

作者: nidm 时间: 2006-9-22 23:31
D -- "hard question is Jounalist's job, it's not inapporaite."
我同意,但是题干里没有, 我也不认为这属于COMMON SENSE范畴. 就象我前面说的"加入了自己的感觉"

作者: fredshen 时间: 2006-9-23 04:28

以下是引用nidm在2006-9-22 23:31:00的发言：
D -- "hard question is Jounalist's job, it's not inapporaite."
我同意,但是题干里没有, 我也不认为这属于COMMON SENSE范畴. 就象我前面说的"加入了自己的感觉"

Rather, it dictates that there are situations in which the expression of potentially offensive, disturbing, or controversial ideas is inappropriate and that, where appropriate, the expression and discussion of such ideas is to be done in a civil manner.

Clear cut. All the law restriction is smoke screen IMO. Importantly, the Etiquette talk has to be apporiate and civic for situation, and equally importantly there is alternative inapproriate for the same situation. It's not free willed common sense, this all come from stem which happens to confrim with common sense. Like be quite in the library, which is appropriate for the situation and the alternative is being loud. A struck me as a good answer initially until I saw E. A's problem was like you say unfriendly talk dont fit in offensive... and it's hard to think there is really a alternative to A's situation being appropriate and civic unless it says troubled neighbor should settle problems in a civic manner in stead of gruffing. But that's not what A is about.

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-23 4:46:33编辑过]

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