ChaseDream
标题: 问一道LSAT逻辑 [打印本页]
作者: andylao2000 时间: 2009-10-30 10:05
标题: 问一道LSAT逻辑
If the city council institutes new parking regulations, city revenues will surely increase, since studies have conclusively shown that, if such parking regulations are put into effect, there is an increase in parking violations, and an increase in parking violations will result in a greater number of parking fines collected.
21. Which one of the following is closest, in terms of its logical features, to the reasoning used in the argument above?
(A) Last year’s increase in revenues can be easily explained. That was the year the city council instituted new parking regulations. No doubt the new law brought with it an increase in the number of parking violations.
(B) If taxes were increased, this act would naturally result in increased revenues for the city, and increased revenues would make some desirable social programs possible. So, if taxes were increased, some desirable social
programs would become possible.
(C) Henry says that, if the city council goes into closed session, an important matter of personnel policy is being discussed. However, no personnel matters were discussed at the council meeting, so if Henry is right, the council did not go into closed session.
(D) All cars parked on the north side of the street were ticketed last night, and the same cars were towed away this morning. So beware! A car ticketed in this city also gets towed away.（B）
(E) Allen says that, if the city council institutes new parking regulations, it is unlikely that revenues for the city will increase. If Allen is right, then the parking regulation plan should not be instituted.
这题的背后逻辑是什么？对于相似的题目应该怎么处理？请xdjm们指点迷津
作者: wenwliu 时间: 2009-11-14 05:36
I think the answer is A....but that's just my two cents.
There is a missing link in the question where greater $ of fines collected was not directly linked to increase in revenue.
A has the same problem where increase in # of parking violations was not directly linked to increase in revenue.
作者: GMATMASTER 时间: 2009-11-14 12:51
I would choose B
作者: ashley0707 时间: 2011-9-4 09:39
原文的逻辑是：regulations-fines- revenues，B项：taxes increase-revenue-programs，
错选A，但是不明白
猜测：A是武断下结论一个东西肯定是（no doubt）原因，但是原文是一个个推出来，B项也像是一步步推出来的感觉
作者: 日落归田园 时间: 2011-9-7 11:18
I would chose B.
原因是原文是regulations-fines-revenues
B是tax increase-revenue-social programs
原文是想说regulatons导致revenues
而B项是说tax increase导致social programs
期中fines和revenue都是为了联系逻辑而引入的中间概念，以保证推理成立
作者: IsabelleJDLaw 时间: 2011-12-26 18:17
楼主这道题贴全了吗？还是整个reading的part贴出？C里面的东西前文有提过吗？如果有的话我觉得是C呢……大家觉得呢？
作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-12-26 21:53
This is parallel reasoning, whose correct answer, in most cases, has nothing to do with the original argument.
The correct answer will have the SAME reasoning pattern as that of the argument.
楼主这道题贴全了吗？还是整个reading的part贴出？C里面的东西前文有提过吗？如果有的话我觉得是C呢……大家觉得呢？
-- by 会员 IsabelleJDLaw (2011/12/26 18:17:27)
作者: wli18 时间: 2012-3-7 13:51
我是新来的， 这个帖子已经是好几年前的了，我想A的错误原因是少了一环，而且A根本是对照原文，但又比原文少了一环，所以不可以算作parallel reasoning. 而这题的思路就是上面几个人说的，B项跟原文一一对应，只是conclusion和evidence位置对调了而已。所以B为正确选项。而且A与原文是相同内容，在parallel reasoning里面基本上就是错误选项的标志，因为parallel reasoning考的是逻辑上的类比，而不是单纯内容上的相似， 至于conclusion和evidence的位置是没有影响的。
作者: 旺财财 时间: 2014-9-4 23:16
看过谢谢lz~~~~~
作者: pla2008 时间: 2015-2-4 10:13
学习中
作者: Bensontuo 时间: 2019-7-23 19:39
Really simple
If A, then D
Since:
If A, then B, If B, then C, If C, then D.
A. Its not conditional logic, its cause - effect relationship
B. If A, then B, IF B, then C, so, If A, then C. So, If A, then C ( Closest right answer )
C. If A, then B. However, No B, so No A ( Its Contra positive )
D. At least 1 out of 100 would be showing a characteristic, so, any sample of that 100 would be also showing that characteristic ( Sample to conclude the group )
E. IF A, then B, and If C ( if a, then b ) is correct, then no A ( Totally different versus our original argument structure ).
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |