OG 11-110:
110. "Fast cycle time" is a strategy of designing a manufacturing organization to eliminate bottlenecks and delays in production. Not only does it speed up production, but it also ensures quality. The reason is
that the bottlenecks and delays cannot be eliminated unless all work is done right the first time.
The claim about quality made above rests on a questionable presupposition that____
(A) any flaw in work on a product would cause a bottleneck or delay and so would be prevented from occurring on a "fast cycle" production line (答案)
(B) the strategy of "fast cycle time" would require fundamental rethinking of product design
(C) the primary goal of the organization is to produce a product of unexcelled quality,
rather than to generate profits for stockholders
(D) "fast cycle time" could be achieved by shaving time off each of the component processes in a production cycle
(E) "fast cycle time" is a concept in business strategy that has not yet been put into practice in a factory
文中最后一句提到，＂推理是，不能消除瓶颈（和延迟）除非所有的工作一开始就正确＂由于是not Ａ unless Ｂ的句式，这句话的意思也就是说＂消除瓶颈-->一开始就正确＂，也就等于＂一开始错误，那么就有瓶颈＂．这样的话就与Ａ选项完全相符了，那我就不明白了，题干要的是假设，可Ａ是从文章的最后一句话里直接推理出来的，怎么就对文章构成了假设呢？？
多谢！！！
UPUPUPUUPUPUPUPU!!!!
UP!
怎么都没人回答呢……
期待ing……
要说做题，这道题真是不难，BCDE都是典型的无关项，一扫答案就出来了！
要说逻辑，有点意思！
正如卡小姐所言，A能不能成为文章的假设呢？
呵呵，这里有一个很有意思的逻辑中的逻辑问题!也涉及到一个审题的问题，题目中问得是什么？
"the claim about quality made above...." 那么这个Claim是什么：FCT can ensure quality。对吧！它的presupposition 是什么，是不是 the reason is that....的内容？而且从正常人的逻辑来讲（我个人一直强调GMAT考得就是正常人的逻辑），这个内容是不是 quetionable？
如果您对以上的内容回到都是：是。那么如果把the reason is that...后面的内容写到选项你，你选还是不选？
A就是这些内容的逆否命题啊！也就是等价命题。当然是答案！
不知道说明白没有？也不知道对不对，还请斧正！本人是这样认为的，呵呵！
To Dear 卡小姐：
俺在很多帖子看到过您说就是不能攻击文章前提的说法！对这个，我一直不明白，迫切想向您请教。还望不吝赐教啊！
非常感谢W先生的耐心回答！！
可本题我还是觉得不太明白……文章中"Fast cycle time" is a strategy of designing a manufacturing organization to eliminate bottlenecks and delays in production. 是结论，而Not only does it speed up production, but it also ensures quality. 只是对结论进行进一步的解释，那么The reason is that the bottlenecks and delays cannot be eliminated unless all work is done right the first time.就是文章的前提喽？一般常规的问假设的题目都会是找个与前提和结论都相关并建立其联系的选项，而不是单从前提中推理得出的啊？！本人才疏学浅,理解确实不够透彻，还望多多指教！！
TO：waterteller
这个不能反对前提的理论不知是谁最早提出的,但在上新东方的课程的时候确实是提到过这点,也就是不能反对文章前提.当然了,新东方也不是万能的,并不是说的什么都100%正确.但如果如楼上您所说,前提:A的英语好,结论:A能考好GMAT,削弱:A的英语不好,那前提启不是就白提出了么?!总觉得这样的削弱很不舒服……就像说：我喜欢吃香蕉，所以我吃了，削弱是我压根就不喜欢吃。这样感觉上会怪怪的啊？！
暂时不说这个问题，可否再告诉我几道OG中这种反对前提的逻辑题呢？谢谢！！！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |