ChaseDream

标题: GWD 23-Q40 有人说选C有人说选A。。。糊涂求助 [打印本页]

作者: 灭绝湿太 时间: 2011-5-7 21:19
标题: GWD 23-Q40 有人说选C有人说选A。。。糊涂求助
Political advocacy groups have begun to use information services to disseminate information that is then accessed by the public via personal computer. Since many groups are thus able to bypass traditional news sources, whose reporting is selective, and to present their political views directly to the public, information services present a more balanced picture of the complexities of political issues than any traditional news source presents.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
A. Information services are accessible to enough people to ensure that political advocacy groups can use these services to reach as large a percentage of the public as they could through traditional news sources.
B. People could get a thorough understanding of a particular political issue by sorting through information provided by several traditional news sources, each with differing editorial biases.
C. Information on political issues disseminated through information services does not come almost entirely from advocacy groups that share a single bias.
D. Traditional news sources seldom report the views of political advocacy groups accurately.
E. Most people who get information on political issues from newspapers and other traditional news sources can readily identify the editorial biases of those sources.

题干我这么理解：通过向个人电脑传输信息的方式传播信息，从而绕开了传统的方式（有选择性的），直接面向大众，information services比传统新闻方式更综合的呈现出复杂政治问题的景象。
=====

选A的话好像无关，选C的话不太明白啥意思（难道是因为a more balanced picture of the complexities of political issues）！~~

向各位NN求助！~~谢谢啦！~

作者: kikisunflower 时间: 2011-5-7 22:01
conclusion: information services can present a more balanced picture of political issues

C: the political issues are balanced from its orgin

if not C: the political issuse are not balanced from its orgin, we can't reach the conclusion then.

作者: 灭绝湿太 时间: 2011-5-7 22:12

conclusion: information services can present a more balanced picture of political issues

C: the political issues are balanced from its orgin

if not C: the political issuse are not balanced from its orgin, we can't reach the conclusion then.

-- by 会员 kikisunflower (2011/5/7 22:01:32)

哦~~~原来要这么理解。谢谢啦！！！

作者: magichan 时间: 2011-9-24 16:20
这道题可以这样理解么？
政治团体通过information service宣扬观点。因为许多团体可以绕过传统的媒介（有些媒介报道偏颇），直接将政治观点展现给公众。Information service比任何传统新闻来源更能平衡展现政治事件的复杂性。
但还是觉得有点怪怪的~

作者: kevincjx 时间: 2012-2-26 17:29
哪一个假设是论证所依赖的？换句话说使论证成立，哪一个假设必须是真的？是一个必要条件
For now, I'll suggest that "Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?" is stricter than "which of the following supports the conclusion?" There may be several choices that support the conclusion, at least a little bit.

Instead, you should translate this question as "Which of the following MUST be true if you are to have any hope of reaching this conclusion?" or "Which of the following, if ELIMINATED, would kill the conclusion?"

(C) is correct because if information on political issues disseminated through information services WERE almost entirely from advocacy groups that share a single bias, then you COULD NOT claim that information services present a more balanced picture of political issues than traditional news sources

作者: elusive 时间: 2016-2-27 06:08
这题属于H大神归类的“因果”
前提=因，结论=果

对的选项加强因果，错的选项要么和因果无关，要么削弱因果。

果：information services present a more balanced picture of the complexities of political issues than any traditional news source presents.
因：Since many groups are thus able to bypass traditional news sources, whose reporting is selective, and to present their political views directly to the public

简化：因为小组可以跳过不同渠道，因为普通渠道筛选信息，所以小组用的新方式更全面。

A：与因果无关，因为浏览的人跟全部全面无关
B：与因果无关，人们的理解程度跟是否全面无关
C：加强因果，因为这样会使信息更全面
D：一部分在重复前提，一部分与选项无关，精确与全面无关
E：与因果无关，

作者: alzn2765 时间: 2016-2-27 10:54

elusive 发表于 2016-2-27 06:08
这题属于H大神归类的“因果”
前提=因，结论=果

这是补桥题，对于补桥类因果推理还是果因推理的判断不重要，只要填补前提结论之间的gap就好了。
A is selective， B is better than A.
gap: B is less selective than A.

作者: laughingwind 时间: 2018-3-30 21:34
A. Information services are accessible to enough people to ensure that political advocacy groups can use these services to reach as large a percentage of the public as they could through traditional news sources.

对A取非，说的是，这些新媒体能够覆盖的人群和传统媒体所覆盖的数量相当。这里说的是一种结果。而原文仅仅要求说它呈现了更加多元化的声音。至于这个声音发出后有没有被人们接收到，并未谈及。

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