ChaseDream

标题: 各路神仙帮忙~求解GWD一道CR题目为什么选C呢~ [打印本页]

作者: MissDove 时间: 2012-5-2 07:25
标题: 各路神仙帮忙~求解GWD一道CR题目为什么选C呢~
Newspaper editorial:

In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher.

art of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.

B. Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.

C. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.

D. Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.

E. The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

作者: naoyixue 时间: 2012-5-2 08:04
为了减少犯罪率，政府对罪犯很严厉并且使得监狱条件更加严酷。其中不让那些曾经上过相当于大学水平课程的罪犯不再可以学习这些课程（大学同等水平）就是这些措施的一部分。然而，这个措施确违反了政府的最终目的，由于当罪犯们被释放后，那些读过（大学同等水平）课程的学生比那些没有学习过的犯罪少犯罪。

问：下面哪个是前提假设，针对于最后结论（措施是适得其反的）
其实这个问题要结合文中给的信息，不让罪犯们学习类似大学课程
1：不上大学课程不可能阻止罪犯们可能要犯的罪。（好的，那么上了大学课程的人呢？这里没有说的确可能上了的话，会阻止，但是也可能上了的话，不组织罪犯们犯罪，谁知到呢？我们都不知道，因为这里单说了一方面）
2：有前科的人比普通人更容易犯罪（这个和结论没有关系，结论都是有前科的人，区别是读过书和没有读过书的区别）
3：那些在监狱里面学习过大学课程的罪犯在释放后，过去会更多的或者一样的可能（not less than) 相比于其他罪犯去犯罪（其实就是没有读书的人）（其实说明在读完书之后，犯罪少了）这里说了两方面，读书和没有读书的比较，不像A，只说了1方面

作者: naoyixue 时间: 2012-5-2 08:09
且，这里结合文中给出的原因， since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates，说明原本是更容易犯罪，现在反而犯罪少了，那么就更加结论-----不让读书，反而与目的相反。

加强和assumption不一样，一个是随便找个原因能立正就好，后者是要结合文中的信息，来使文中的原因更加唯一，更加正确。立正文中的原因，不能自己随便找

4：上高中课程的比上大学课程的效用少（首先，effect是啥方面的，我们不知道，所以信息太少，不能用，且这个高中课程的效用本身在啥程度，我们也不知道）
5：说了政府的目的，和最终结论没关系

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