ChaseDream

标题: OG 第89题 [打印本页]

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-8-30 12:36
标题: OG 第89题
哪位大侠能帮忙解释下OG第89题？

89.Since it has become known that several of a bank’s top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank’s depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved.
They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.
They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company’s health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the followng roles?

A. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
B. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
E. The first describes the circumstance that the arument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
怎么理解都觉得D是对的，但答案是A.

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-8-31 11:41
自己顶顶，期待大侠出现〜

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-8-31 21:32
再顶顶

作者: chitowngudrifle 时间: 2013-9-1 10:38
第二段不是在给之前的conclusion提供explanation.它在挑战之前的explanation.
从逻辑学的角度,第二段粗体字之前的话已经是完整的argument.

p1) Executives are buying their own stock.
p2) If executives are buying their own stock, then it's an indication that they have faith in their own stock.
p3) If executives have faith in their own stock, then depositors will not be worried that bank may be facing financial collapse.
c1) Depositors are not worried.

所以第二段粗体字提出了新的解释,也就是a里所说的questioning that support.

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-1 11:36

chitowngudrifle 发表于 2013-9-1 10:38
第二段不是在给之前的conclusion提供explanation.它在挑战之前的explanation.
从逻辑学的角度,第二段粗体字 ...

如果结论是those worrisome rumors must be false,那我就认同答案A。
可是为什么不能认为结论是such reasoning might well be over optimistic?
我的思路是这样的。。。。

Background:
Since it has become known that several of a bank’s top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank’s depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved.

opposing opinion:
They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.

Conclusion:
They might well be overoptimistic.

Premise:
however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company’s health.

如果按照这样的思路，那D就对了，不知道这样的思路是否有问题？

作者: chitowngudrifle 时间: 2013-9-1 11:49

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-1 11:36
如果结论是those worrisome rumors must be false,那我就认同答案A。
可是为什么不能认为结论是such reas ...

conclusion不是They are overoptimistic. Rumors are false是conclusion.

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-1 11:51

chitowngudrifle 发表于 2013-9-1 11:49
conclusion不是They are overoptimistic. Rumors are false是conclusion.

好吧，我只是觉得我的思路也貌似很合理。。。。。

作者: chitowngudrifle 时间: 2013-9-1 12:00

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-1 11:51
好吧，我只是觉得我的思路也貌似很合理。。。。。

这么想，你的background和opinion加起来能得到"They are overoptimistic"的吗？“They are optimistic”不是由第二段黑体字暗示的吗？

作者: franciszfy 时间: 2013-9-2 03:59

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-1 11:36
如果结论是those worrisome rumors must be false,那我就认同答案A。
可是为什么不能认为结论是such reas ...

呵呵，我的思路跟你是一摸一样，我也在选项中找XP这种类型的，也是选了D，现在还是不明白为什么错了，你现在懂了吗？

作者: enkyklios 时间: 2013-9-2 08:12
-------------------

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-2 21:03

franciszfy 发表于 2013-9-2 03:59
呵呵，我的思路跟你是一摸一样，我也在选项中找XP这种类型的，也是选了D，现在还是不明白为什么错了，你 ...

看了上面的解释，还是不懂

还有没有其他高手发表下观点？

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 10:49

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-2 21:03
看了上面的解释，还是不懂
还有没有其他高手发表下观点？

BF有问题的同学都是对句子结构的认识不够完善，推荐你看一看逻辑小分队里的SDCAR2010写的《逻辑入门》的前5章，会让你彻底不怕BF题

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-3 11:46

vertex顶点发表于 2013-9-3 10:49
BF有问题的同学都是对句子结构的认识不够完善，推荐你看一看逻辑小分队里的SDCAR2010写的《逻辑入门》的 ...

SDCAR2010的帖子研究过，我的思路就是根据他的方法来的

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 13:47

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-3 11:46
SDCAR2010的帖子研究过，我的思路就是根据他的方法来的

那这道题你不该有问题的since开始到他们的担心relieve了都是back ground information。
they reason that。。。是premis来推出opposite 观点：rumors are false
文章的主观点是（main conclusion）：rumors没错
最后一句话since。。。是证明文章主观点的P
这样分析下来，第一个黑体在背景知识里，第二个黑体在文章主观点的premis里，有什么难的呢？
所以第一个是一个evidence，是depositor用来证明他们观点的。第二个是P，来解释文章的主观点，而主观点和depositor的观点相左，所以证明主观点就是question前面的opposite观点。所以选A
你还是要好好研究一下SDCAR大神的东西，弄懂了真心不会有问题

作者: 云游 时间: 2013-9-3 13:54

enkyklios 发表于 2013-9-2 08:12
-------------------

有看到你啦，留言也不给解释啊~哈哈~

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 13:58

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-2 21:03
看了上面的解释，还是不懂
还有没有其他高手发表下观点？

D看起来很像对的，但是文章理解一下就明白为什么错了。第一个黑体：“因为好多银行高管买自己的股票”，这句话不是文章想要解释的。文章主要想做的事情是否定depositor的观点！ depositor们说，“因为好多银行高管买自己的股票”（黑1）所以大家不要担心啦。这个黑体，是为了证明depositor的观点的，不是文章想解释的内容。要明白作者的真正目的，有助于你做出题目

作者: 云游 时间: 2013-9-3 14:12
Personal POV:

Pay close attention to the diction adopted before and in the B.F. portion--it says the former reasoning "might" be overoptimistic since some executives "have been known to" buy shares in their own company. So the B.F. portion, from my point of view, can't be an explanation(explanation should be 100 percent sufficient in proving the accuracy of something) that could be established, rather it serves at most an assumption that can be used to support the author's hypothetical conclusion--the former reasoning might be wrong.

What's more, the second statement has not explained the why those bank top executives' buying of their own banks' share, rather it explained why the reasoning followed by those banks' behavior might be wrong.

作者: enkyklios 时间: 2013-9-3 14:37

云游发表于 2013-9-3 13:54
有看到你啦，留言也不给解释啊~哈哈~

因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；
文中说因为大家看到公司的大股东都在买自己的股票，所以投资者认为“公司要破产的传闻“是假的。
他们是这样想的，公司业绩好坏大股东肯定知道，如果公司要破产那么他们肯定不会自己把自己套进去，
second指出但是这样想是有问题的，因为很多时候公司高管们出于策略即使公司业绩不好，他们反而大量买进自己的股票，让人误以为公司业绩不错。
大概意思就是这样，可能翻译不准确

所以我觉得选A挺合理啊
第一个是他们这样做的根据，第二个证明这个根据本身就有问题

作者: 云游 时间: 2013-9-3 16:19

enkyklios 发表于 2013-9-3 14:37
因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；

哈哈，术业有专攻，enkyklios能把语法解释的出神入化已经造福多少CDer了~

作者: enkyklios 时间: 2013-9-3 16:56

云游发表于 2013-9-3 16:19
哈哈，术业有专攻，enkyklios能把语法解释的出神入化已经造福多少CDer了~

云游兄謬赞，兄弟愧不敢当

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-3 18:25

vertex顶点发表于 2013-9-3 13:47
那这道题你不该有问题的since开始到他们的担心relieve了都是back ground information。
they reason that ...

请看我***后的回复.

那这道题你不该有问题的since开始到他们的担心relieve了都是back ground information。
they reason that。。。是premis来推出opposite 观点：rumors are false
文章的主观点是（main conclusion）：rumors没错***你是指main conclusion是"Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic"吗?如果是的,那我同意.
最后一句话since。。。是证明文章主观点的P
这样分析下来，第一个黑体在背景知识里，第二个黑体在文章主观点的premis里，有什么难的呢？
所以第一个是一个evidence，是depositor用来证明他们观点的。第二个是P，来解释文章的主观点，而主观点和depositor的观点相左，所以证明主观点就是question前面的opposite观点。所以选A***我highlight出红色的部分不是正好是选项D中的"the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish."吗? the argument seeks to establish的就是main conclusion啊? 我不否认选项A, 只是对于选项D,不明白为什么第二段BF不能作为explanation.
你还是要好好研究一下SDCAR大神的东西，弄懂了真心不会有问题

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-3 18:26

vertex顶点发表于 2013-9-3 13:58
D看起来很像对的，但是文章理解一下就明白为什么错了。第一个黑体：“因为好多银行高管买自己的股票”， ...

明白,现在理解为什么D中关于第一个BF是错的,谢谢

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-3 18:59

云游发表于 2013-9-3 14:12
Personal POV:

Pay close attention to the diction adopted before and in the B.F. portion--it says t ...

  Thanks for you detailed reply, actually,  I never think that the second BF has explained " why those bank top executives' buying of their own banks' share", however it is just a PREMISE of main conclusion" Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic", so it should be an explanation for main conclusion.
  You mentioned that the explanation should be 100% to prove the accuracy of something, I'm afraid I can't fully agree, as "explanation" is not "evidence", it can be stated subjectively. Although there is a MIGHT, but author's opnion is clearly confirmed.
  Look forward to your further advise if it is not too dizzy for you

作者: 云游 时间: 2013-9-4 16:50

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-3 18:59
Thanks for you detailed reply, actually, I never think that the second BF has explained " why t ...

Hey there,

Please kindly read answer choice D closely.

If I got it correctly, it states that the first sentence describe a circumstance which is in need of an explanation and the second sentence is that explanation. So, as is also noticed by you, the second sentence has not explained this circumstance--several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank.

I thought I might be wrong in citing the property of "explanation" as evidence.So please neglect it for the time being.

作者: virgmat 时间: 2013-9-4 17:26

云游发表于 2013-9-4 16:50
Hey there,

Please kindly read answer choice D closely.

Yes, I agree, now I am well noted about the error of the first sentence in option D.
Nevertheless, what make me confused is the answer explanation of option D in OG, that never mentions the fault of first sentence, but just criticize the second sentence, here I quote the original text for your reference~

"The second statement is not itself offered as an explanation of why these bank executives are investing in the bank; if it were, that would mean that the bank executives are doing so because corporate executives are known to do such things in a calculated effort to dispel worries. Furthermore the argument does not conclude that this other explanation(which the boldfaced portion points to) is correct, only that the one inferred by depositors may not be."

Personally think the explanation above doesn't hit the mark, because the second sentence of D is "gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish",not gives the explanation of the reason of investment, and what argument seeks to establish is main conclusion, right?

I shouldn't have doubted the authority of the OG but it's indeed illogical for me.

作者: jennychiu 时间: 2014-1-19 10:54

enkyklios 发表于 2013-9-3 14:37
因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；

啊啊啊啊啊，看懂了诶~~~~~··豁然开朗。谢谢啦

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