ChaseDream

标题: [求助]此题的问题分析该何解？/大全-14-11 [打印本页]

作者: tinayc 时间: 2004-11-2 03:19
标题: [求助]此题的问题分析该何解？/大全-14-11

Caterpillars of all species produce an identical hormone called "juvenil hormone" that maintains feeding behaviour. Only when a caterpillar has grown to the right size for pupation to take place does a special enzyme halt the production of juvenile hormone. This enzyme can be synthesized and will, on being ingested by immature caterpillars, kill them by stopping them from feeding.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the view that it would not be advisable to try to eradicate agricultural peswts that go through a caterpillar stage by spraying croplands with the enzyme mentioned above?

B. Many agricultural pests do not go through a caterpillar stage.

C. Many agriculturally beneficial insects go through a caterpillar stage.(key)

请教NN，此题该怎样做问题分析？为什么我觉得B C都是在取非？

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-11-2 11:52
答案为C。B确实有迷惑性。但结论讲的是peswts that go through a caterpillar stage 。所以没有经过幼虫阶段的不在谈论范围。是OUT OF SCOPE。

作者: mindfree 时间: 2004-11-2 12:18

You have to know what the question is about. It specifically asks about killing pests that go through caterpillar stage. So the answer only need to focus on such pests. Even if there is only one species of pest going through such stage, C is still correct.

You think B is correct because you did not get the question right. If the question asks about killing pests at large, B might be right.

I am not sure whether I am clear enough. Let me give you a simple example:

Tim will do anything for money. So I can pay him to paint my house. You cannot argue that most people would not paint your house for money because the argument is about Tim specifically, not anybody else.

作者: tinayc 时间: 2004-11-3 02:24
Thanks Lawyer_1 and mindfree. I understand you both emphasize that " that go through a carepillar stage" modifies pests as a clause and specifies which pests it mentioned in the passage. Am I right? 因此当从句作为整体修饰pests时，不可以加否定词，否则pests的属性就变了，这样理解对吗？

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-11-3 03:18
加否定词就变为另外一个话题了。当然不同

作者: xyl927 时间: 2004-11-5 23:54
I think the explanation why B is not right can be that - even many agricultural pests do not go through a caterpillar stage, as long as there are few harmful pests go throught a caterpillar stage, it is feasible to eradicate them by spraying croplands with the enzyme mentioned above. Do you get it?

作者: xyl927 时间: 2004-11-5 23:57
By the way, I do not like to explain one thing through mechanical reasoning. Sometimes it is much simple to go with your instinct. If you ask me to understand a large paragraph of reasoning, I may be even confused.

作者: hpp920 时间: 2004-11-8 05:25

此题我用的是xy1927的想法.

对于此题用out of scope的想法排除B我有点疑惑.全文讨论的是Caterpillars that go through a caterpillar state. 如果not go through a caterpillar 不在讨论范围之类, 那么Many agriculturally beneficial insects 也应该out of scope呀?

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-11-8 08:33
不在谈论范围不是指原文没说。而是原文结论的特殊性决定的。结论是用该方法杀那些go through a caterpillar stage 的害虫可不可行。所以你说很多害虫不经过幼虫阶段当然对结论没作用。举个例，我问你我打算养只猫在家里逮老鼠可不可行，你说很多老鼠又不来你家，你说可以削弱我的结论吗。如果很多老鼠不来我家，那不是更好，问题是我要杀的是我家里的老鼠，不是不来我家的老鼠。

作者: hpp920 时间: 2004-11-8 09:47

多谢lawyer的指点! 请帮忙看我下面的理解对不对:

我打算养只猫在家里逮老鼠可不可行: 讨论的是用某种工具逮老鼠的可行性.

很多老鼠又不来你家:讨论的是家里有无老鼠的问题

讨论的中心议点不同, 所以out of scope.是这样吗? 我又有一个问题: irrelevant也是讨论的中心点和提干不一致,那么和out of scope的区别是什么? 我的理解是out of scope的选项中心点和要讨论的中心点有一定的关系,但还差了步没走到议点,所以具有迷惑性: 如家里有无老鼠决定了要不要用某种工具逮老鼠, 再下一步才是用某种工具逮老鼠的可行性问题. 而irrelevant的选项就是完全无关, 如有选项说, 现在地球上的老鼠主要以垃圾为生.

我的理解不知到对不对, 还请指教, 谢谢!

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-8 9:52:00编辑过]

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-11-8 20:27

1。“很多老鼠又不来你家:讨论的是家里有无老鼠的问题”。我认为很多老鼠不来你家不是家里有没有老鼠的问题，要看具体情形。

2。现在在用IRRELEVANT和OUTOF SCOPE一定意义上是相同的。细分对做题意义不大。不过如果你觉得对你有帮助你就继续用，因为各人不同。

3。我对OUT OF SCOPE的理解是和结论的特殊性无关，即结论在谈论某个特殊的问题（这有时要结合选项的方向），选项却是另一个问题，不可能对结论起作用。我目前还无法将这个概念量化。

作者: hpp920 时间: 2004-11-9 02:48
多谢了!做题的时候我也是不区分的, 没时间

就是做后分析的时候才会这么想.

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