ChaseDream

标题: 逻辑题目求问各位NN [打印本页]

作者: 宝贝的幸福 时间: 2014-4-28 16:11
标题: 逻辑题目求问各位NN
1.In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.

It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?

I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.

II. More government workers should be fired.

III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.

(A) I only

(B) I and III only

(D) I, II, and III（A）

(E) III only

将Civil Service过渡到government为什么不选III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
答案是a

2.17. Ronald: According to my analysis of the national economy, housing prices should not increase during the next six months unless interest rates drop significantly.

Mark: I disagree. One year ago, when interest rates last fell significantly, housing prices did not increase at all.

It can be inferred from the conversation above that Mark has interpreted Ronald’s statement to mean that

(A) housing prices will rise only if interest rates fall

(B) if interest rates fall, housing prices must rise

(D) interest rates are the only significant economic factor affecting housing prices（B）

(E) interest rates are likely to fall significantly in the next six months

这道题的问题不应该是问的Mark的观点吗？，怎么感觉选c
答案是b

作者: 捉妖 时间: 2014-4-28 16:58
抛砖引玉~~~

第一题不选3是因为
1）可能 Civil Service employee是一个瓶颈，人少却对government的效率有很大影响
2）开除 Civil Service employee和开除government其他员工可能政策相同，所以government效率低
不一定是3说的情况。

第二题：
Ronald说除非 interest rates 大跌，否则房价将不会增长。
Mark说不同意，一年前，interest rates大跌了，房价都没涨。
问的是Mark怎么理解Ronald的这句话的。
从Mark的回答看出，他对R说的话提出了一个反例来disagree。他把Ronald说的话当成了： interest rates 大跌，房价必然增长。

作者: 宝贝的幸福 时间: 2014-4-28 17:13

捉妖发表于 2014-4-28 16:58
抛砖引玉~~~

第一题不选3是因为

哦~原来第二道题题意都没理解，囧。。谢谢~

作者: angelina30205 时间: 2014-4-28 17:17
我来补充~

敢问楼主理解第一题问的是什么？是inference还是assumption? 你的“过渡”该是假设题的思路吧？

不知道这么说，你能理解吗？

本题是果因逻辑。government is inefficient是果，被解释的现象。换句话说，果，被解释，问的是进一步的内容，该是对因的inference。

作者: boalgmat 时间: 2014-4-28 22:55
第一个应该是假设题对待
找出漏洞或gap 填平就好了
前提：由于开除太贵员工知道后开始loaf
结论：政府不高效
所以Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers. 所以大家消极-导致loaf=政府不高效
对于第二个是loaf-导致开除不是前提
对于第三个是政府雇员多-跟导致loaf没有关系=不能说明低效

作者: 宝贝的幸福 时间: 2014-4-29 10:35

angelina30205 发表于 2014-4-28 17:17
我来补充~

敢问楼主理解第一题问的是什么？是inference还是assumption? 你的“过渡”该是假设题的思路吧？ ...

懂了您的意思，但是还有一个问题，是不是因的inference并不影响果，或者说是和果无关的呢？

作者: angelina30205 时间: 2014-4-29 19:08

宝贝的幸福发表于 2014-4-29 10:35
懂了您的意思，但是还有一个问题，是不是因的inference并不影响果，或者说是和果无关的呢？ ...

我是这么理解的~
其实，你可以对上面的截图，再理解一下。那是CR Bible里的节选。

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