ChaseDream

标题: 提供一道充分必要条件的好题 [打印本页]
作者: weiyu    时间: 2004-3-7 01:12
标题: 提供一道充分必要条件的好题
    

L2001/10-4-21提供一道充分必要条件的好题fficeffice" />


21.Political scientist: As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom. There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies. Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects.


The reasoning in the political scientist’s argument is flawed because it


(A) confuses the conditions necessary for political freedom with the conditions sufficient to bring it about


(B) fail to consider that a substantial increase in the level of political freedom might cause a society to become more democratic


(C) appeals to historical examples that are irrelevant to the causal claim being made


(D) overlooks the possibility that democracy promotes political freedom without being necessary or sufficient by itself to produce it（D）


(E) bases its historical case on a personal point of view


    


Answer is D; 请考虑一下为何A不对?

作者: paopao    时间: 2004-3-7 07:21
weiyu,我糊涂了。能讲讲吗？谢谢。
作者: ecsniffer    时间: 2004-3-7 11:02
My explanation:



First, analysize the passage as belowing:


As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom(conclusion). There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom). Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).


By citing the counter-evidences that suggest democracy doesn't sufficiently or nessarily promote political freedom, the arguer draws the conclusion that democracy does not promote political freedom.    The arguer commits the fallacy of "Hasty Generalization" because he ignores some other evidences    which support the opinion that democracy does promote political freedom.


So, answer D.


A is inconsistent with the reasoning of the argument.


For further dissusion!








[此贴子已经被作者于2004-3-7 11:06:57编辑过]
作者: paopao    时间: 2004-3-7 13:07
ecsniffer , sorry , i am still confused.



There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies--->(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom).


I share the same opinion with u .


But , how can u refer to the following? I don't know how can u get the boldface part .


    Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects-->(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).


Thank u for your help.

作者: weiyu    时间: 2004-3-7 14:50
ecsniffer is right. the necessary condition means that the conclusion cannot turn out without the premise. For this question, because despotisms and oligarchies can bring the freedom without democracy, therefore democracy is not a necessary condition; from the first sentence, you can reach a conclusion that democracy is not sufficient condition for freedom

作者: ecsniffer    时间: 2004-3-7 14:50
yeah,paopao


The sentence that democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom (译成中文就是促成政治自由，民主并不是必要条件)means that some other things may promote political freedom, such as despotisms and oligarchies

作者: paopao    时间: 2004-3-7 19:10
以下是引用weiyu在2004-3-7 14:50:00的发言：
ecsniffer is right. the necessary condition means that the conclusion cannot turn out without the premise. For this question, because despotisms and oligarchies can bring the freedom without democracy, therefore democracy is not a necessary condition; from the first sentence, you can reach a conclusion that democracy is not sufficient condition for freedom







weiyu,ecsniffer , i got it now. Thank you for your kind response.


Thesed days, i tried to distinguish between     the necessary condition and the sufficient condition, the basis of logic. However, I still cannot straight it out.


More questions and suggestions about sufficient    conditions and necessary conditions are highly appreciated.


Thank u .    



    

作者: paopao    时间: 2004-3-7 19:22
BTW, if possible, can u provide the link which might help to differ the sufficent conditions and necessary conditions in logic?


I am keen to solve my problem.Thanks.

作者: happycg    时间: 2008-4-4 21:00
dddddddddddddddddddddddddd
作者: beichenxuans    时间: 2009-8-27 12:28
以下是引用ecsniffer在2004/3/7 11:02:00的发言：
My explanation:

First, analysize the passage as belowing:
As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom(conclusion). There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom). Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).
By citing the counter-evidences that suggest democracy doesn't sufficiently or nessarily promote political freedom, the arguer draws the conclusion that democracy does not promote political freedom. The arguer commits the fallacy of "Hasty Generalization" because he ignores some other evidences which support the opinion that democracy does promote political freedom.
So, answer D.
A is inconsistent with the reasoning of the argument.
For further dissusion!


神贴 挖坟



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