标题: 求救一道逻辑题 [打印本页] 作者: bonnie0715 时间: 2010-2-28 15:44 标题: 求救一道逻辑题 Ross: The profitability of Company X, restored to private ownership five years ago, is clear evidence that businesses will always fare better under private than under public ownership.
Julia: Wrong. A close look at the records shows that X has been profitable since the appointment of a first-class manager, which happened while X was still in the public sector.
Which of the following best describes the weak point in Ross’s claim on which Julia’s response focuses? (A)The evidence Ross cites comes from only a single observed case, that of Company X. (B)The profitability of Company X might be only temporary. (C)Ross’s statement leaves open the possibility that the cause he cites came after the effect he attributes to it. (D)No mention is made of companies that are partly government owned and partly privately owned. (E)No exact figures are given for the current profits of Company X. A:C) 为什么不是A呢，julia说公司开始盈利是从fist-class manager被聘请开始的，所以可能是因为这个mnager导致公司盈利的。所以ross只是从一个方面即公私有制考虑问题。作者: yuzi731 时间: 2010-2-28 16:24
A是说R仅从Company X这一个例子看问题
是啊。ross只考虑company x 的一个方面啊,就是公私有制啊。J也只讨论了profit的来源，他说从换manager开始，同时那时也是公有制就开始了。就是说是manager引起的咯。就是另外一个方面咯。不是公私有制咯。
-- by 会员 bonnie0715 (2010/2/28 21:08:15)
A single observed case means the case of Company X, 不是指company x的一个方面作者: xuchanggu 时间: 2010-3-1 18:58
提干要求是Julia的着重点在哪里？ Ross从逻辑推理来看是以偏概全，虽有错误。但是这个错误不是Julia所针对的。我用排除法会选C。作者: bonnie0715 时间: 2010-3-6 20:23
谢谢