本贴相关题目 OG-2017-CR-633OG-2017-CR-633
OG-2016-CR-88
OG-2015-CR-100
OG-13-CR-100
... (SHZG)

00:00:00

Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime.

The debater's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of these grounds?

AIt takes for granted that the manufacturing division is a typical division of the corporation with regard to the average amount of overtime its employees work each month.
BIt takes for granted that if a certain average amount of overtime is worked each month by each employee of the Haglut Corporation, then approximately the same amount of overtime must be worked each month by each employee of the manufacturing division.
CIt confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.
DIt overlooks the possibility that even if, on average, a certain amount of overtime is worked by the members of some group, many members of that group may work no overtime at all.
EIt overlooks the possibility that even if most employees of the corporation work some overtime each month, any one corporate employee may, in some months, work no overtime..

正确答案: D

og13th 100题选项看不懂求解释

[复制链接]

shally莎莎

楼主

发表于 2013-10-9 12:38:36 | 显示全部楼层

试着解释一下C选项吧。
It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.
紫色部分是修饰成分。
修饰成分1：那个被结论紧跟着的claim，即premise
修饰成分1：那个紧跟着结论的可能性很大的claim，即mid-conclusion后的main conclusion
总的来说：作者混淆了the line of reasoning中conclusion前面的claim和conclusion后面的claim。
所以这句话的意思，可以抽象地理解为：作者混淆了一个premise和并不肯定但可能性很大的推论。