寻求高手为我解答几道OG12thCR的真题

sdcar2010

63

A is right. Since the deaf part and the replying part are dissociated from each other, we can deduce the part that replies is not deaf.  Thus, when answering the question "Can you hear me?", they should reply "Yes!"

D is wrong because if the hearing part and the deaft part are separated, all subjects can give a uniformed answer to the same question.  This is in accordance to the theorist hypothesis.  For example, if they all answer "Yes," the hypothesis holds. So the fact that the answers are uniformed does not weaken the argument.

sdcar2010

81

This is a simple question in terms of logic.

Premise: 1) when demand is high, more money is spent for saftey precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low.
           
Conclusion: The average number of work-related accidents per employee per month should be lower when demand is high than when demand is low.

The assumption is that 1) NOTHING else changes or matters when comparing safety data between high demand period and low demand period; 2) more money spent on safety precaustions and machinery maintenance will lead to reduction on accident rate per worker.

To weaken this argument, you need to find a condition, if true, casts more doubt on the argument.  One way to do this is to attack the assumptions.  B simply does that by pointing out one key difference between the two periods - new workers are hired during the high demand period.  These workers lack safety training and would be accident-prone during the high demand period.  Thus, the argument is weakened.

sdcar2010

104 has been discussed over and over. Google for explanations on this forum.