ChaseDream

标题: 霏霏65-->babypace转移 [打印本页]

作者: smilecake 时间: 2004-4-14 04:54
标题: 霏霏65

为什么不选D呢？

65According to advertisements, the higher a suntan lotion’s sun protection factor, or SPE, the more protection from sunburn. In order for a suntan lotion to work, however, one has to remember to put it on before going in the sun, put on an adequate amount to cover the skin, and reapply it as needed. Therefore, it really does not matter what SPE a suntan lotion has.

Which one of the following best identifies the error in reasoning made in the passage?

(A) It is unreasonable to assume that the only purpose of a suntan lotion is to provide protection from sunburn.

(B) Because some people get sunburned more easily than other, the fact that there are different SPEs cannot be ignored.

(C) It cannot be concluded that the SPEs is not important just because there are requirements for the application of the suntan lotion.

(D) It is unreasonable to assume that all suntan lotions required the same application procedures in order to work effectively.

(E) There is no reason to assume that manufacturers are unaware that people sometimes forget to apply suntan lotion before going in the sun.

作者: delldell 时间: 2004-4-14 22:44

C 吧

讨论的是两个不同的论证啊, 一个是关于用法,一个是含量, 不能因为用法的作用而overwrite含量的作用啊

作者: smilecake 时间: 2004-4-15 02:24
非常感谢两位！

作者: hougang 时间: 2004-12-27 21:49

65According to advertisements, the higher a suntan lotion’s sun protection factor, or SPE, the more protection from sunburn.

唉，我现在还不是太理解这个题目，连句子都没有搞清楚，请大家这是一下，

factor是什么意思，我当时做的时候把spe当成了sun protection factor的同为语，愣是半天没有看懂题目，请大家指教，谢谢

作者: LES 时间: 2004-12-27 22:11

“Sun Protection Factor” 防晒系数，“SPE”就是它的首字母缩略词。

题目的逻辑分析南瓜已经讲得很清楚了。

涂防晒霜要对皮肤真正起到保护作用，既要求防晒霜本身的防晒系数要高，又要求正确的涂用方法。题目的逻辑错误在于文中说到了涂用方法的重要性，结论却是防晒系数就不重要了。

防晒系数和涂用方法本属于两个范畴，所以没有替代性。

作者: hougang 时间: 2004-12-27 22:34
标题: 霏霏65-->babypace转移

啊，彻底明白，谢谢les斑竹！！

作者: Bensontuo 时间: 2019-8-16 15:45

smilecake 发表于 2004-4-14 04:54
为什么不选D呢？ 65According to advertisements, the higher a suntan lotion’s sun protection factor, ...

Spot the question type: Method of the reasoning - Spot the errors.

Core of the argument:

Higher SPE ---> More the protection

Protection works ---> Put SPE before going to the sun + Adequate amount to cover the skin + reapply if needed.

So, It does not mater " what kind " of the SPE a suntan lotion has.

1. We do not have any evidence showing that whether the amount of SPE and the kind of SPE be relevant to the protection. Only we do know from the argument is Higher the SPE, Better the Protection, but we do not know if all SPE are the same.

If regardless of the SPE inside the lotions makes no differences as to protection, then it must be true that all of the SPE inside of the lotion can all create the same effect. ( However, it is the flaw of concluding that a characteristic belongs to the sample could also be shown to the group contains that samples )

A. It is not relevant to the argument, nor does the argument make such assumption

B. Exactly the fact that different SPE can't be ignored due to the level of getting sunburns might be different for some people, but it does not mean those people can't put more of the " different kind of SPE " to achieve the same effect, and if that's the case, then we can still say it could be true that regardless of the kinds of SPE inside of the lotions, it can still achieve the purpose of suntan protection.

C. Regardless of the requirements of using the lotion, by which evidence could argument to prove it is sufficient enough to guarantee it is not important to differentiate the kinds of SPE ?

Correct answer !

D. Application procedures here are the requirements to have the lotion works effectively; however, we are spotting flaw of the reasoning process from the premises of discussing the requirements to the conclusions not relevant to the premises.

E. It does not really relevant to the argument.

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)