Environmentalist: The use of snowmobiles in the vast park north of Milville create sun acceptable levels of air pollution and should be banned.
这道题目我实在没搞懂说话者的逻辑是什么，也就做不出题目了，烦请NN帮我解析此题～～～～
Milville business spokesperson: Snowmobiling brings many out-of-towners to Milville in winter months, to the great financial benefit of many local residents. So, economics dictate that we put up with the pollution.
Environmentalist: I disagree: A great many cross-country skiers are now kept from visiting Milville by the noise and pollution that snowmobiles generate.
Environmentalist responds to the business spokesperson by doing which of the following?
A. Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome can derive from only one set of circumstances[C1]
B. Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome is outweighed by negative aspects associated with producing that outcome[C2]
C. Maintaining that the benefit that the spokesperson desires could be achieved in greater degree by a different means[C3]
D. Claiming that the spokesperson is deliberately misrepresenting the environmentalist’s position in order to be better able to attack it[C4]
E. Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of people actually benefited those people[C5]
E. Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of people actually benefited those people[C5] I choose E
I choose E
我选B
Environmentalist: A (The use of snowmobiles) leads to B (air pollution)
Milville business spokesperson: A (The use of snowmobiles) leads to C (financial benefit)
Environmentalist: I disagree: A does not lead to C
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |