标题: 请教GWD一道逻辑题，谢谢！ [打印本页] 作者: andreasyang 时间: 2010-8-24 17:41 标题: 请教GWD一道逻辑题，谢谢！ Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party. C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties. E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.
why the answer would be B??作者: amy虫子 时间: 2010-8-24 17:48
B 取反 说那些陪批准的， 但是被鉴定为“wasteful"的项目都是在总统的区域里，那就说明他有政治报复了，同样是'wasteful‘ ，自己区域的项目就能通过，政敌的就通不过作者: Areak 时间: 2010-8-24 18:35
楼主请注意一个问题：凡是选项中和题目中出现的，都是事实真相。以这个标杆为前提，如B中所说：wasteful的项目事实上由对方党派占领的区域占了大多数，因此就得出总统的决定是根据是否wasteful而不是partisan了。 不要用XDF那套假设题目找not然后取非的讨论，实战过你就知道，真实考试里的逻辑题没有那么多not给你去取非的，所谓取非，无非是XDF忽悠学生的一个比较方便的教学方法罢了，实战意义不是很大。