ChaseDream

标题: 求助OG13 48（即OG12 50）！题目做对了，但是对OG的D\E解释不理解！ [打印本页]

作者: 杀G给猴看 时间: 2013-3-24 15:09
标题: 求助OG13 48（即OG12 50）！题目做对了，但是对OG的D\E解释不理解！
OG13 CR48

Although computers can enhance people’s ability to communicate, computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children. After-school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking with people. Therefore, children who spend all their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.
The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
(B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after-school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
(C) Children who do not spend all of their after-school hours playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
(D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children’s acquisition of communication skills.
(E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children’s intellectual development.

答案是C。题是做对了，但是对OG的D\E项解释实在是无法理解。下面是OG的解释：
D：This could be false and the argument could still be sound; perhaps children who spend all their spare time playing computer games receive no formal instruction.
E：This could be false and the argument could still be sound as long as the intellectual developmeng the games contribute to does not contribute to the development of communication skills.
我自己排除这两个选项的想法和OG不一样。我认为D项中的formal instruction就是irrelevant，没说是哪一类的孩子会接受formal instruction，也没说不玩游戏的时间就去接受这个instruction了，即使考虑instruction，我觉得也是不玩游戏的孩子更可能受到formal instruction，如果f.i.还不能提高skills的话，反而是把原题weaken了，所以排除；但OG说，即使这个assumption错了，原来命题也成立，尤其是看了Perhaps后面那句，我就更不理解了——难道OG是说玩游戏的孩子会受到f.i.？
我对E选项的看法是，intellectual development的mental skills和communication skills可能不完全是一回事，而且最后结论里面讲的是interpersoanl communication，再加上没有C选项说的直接，就排除了。而OG的解释还是，即使E项不对，原命题仍成立……我觉得，像OG提到的，contribute的根本就不包括communication skills，那E项和原题根本就没有关系，怎么会the argument is still sound呢？TT

好吧，我是不是已经讲得太乱了……TT……
我知道，我们不能怀疑OG，所以，一定是我的想法有问题……但我现在实在是无法理解OG的逻辑了…TT…几近抓狂…TT…求大家帮帮忙哦！

作者: JennyF 时间: 2013-3-25 00:02
在bible上解决assumption的一种方法。。忘了名字，大概是这样：
否定选项，如果否定之后结论不成立，那就是正确答案；反之，否定选项，结论仍然成立，则是错误选项。。。
看起来OG用的是这个思路吧。。

作者: 杀G给猴看 时间: 2013-3-25 18:15

JennyF 发表于 2013-3-25 00:02
在bible上解决assumption的一种方法。。忘了名字，大概是这样：
否定选项，如果否定之后结论不成立，那就 ...

嗯，谢谢~~
我的理解也是用类似取非的方法来看……

刚才又想了一下觉得我可能没有理解好“the argument still holds”的意思……其实OG应该是说，只有没有weaken原来的argument（strengthen或者irrelevant）就都是still holds了~~

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