请教一道LSAT题目

shellyaaa

Although this bottle is labeled “vinegar,” no fizzing occurred when some of the liquid in it was added to powder from this box labeled “baking soda.” But when an acidic liquid such as vinegar is added to baking soda the resulting mixture fizzes, so this bottle clearly has been mislabeled.
A flaw in the reasoning in the argument above is that this argument
(A) ignores the possibility that the bottle contained an acidic liquid other than vinegar
(B) fails to exclude an alternative explanation for the observed effect
(C) depends on the use of the imprecise term “fizz”
(D) does not take into account the fact that scientific principles can be definitively tested only under controlled laboratory conditions
(E) assumes that the fact of a labeling error is proof of an intention to deceive
这种题目的解题思路是怎么样的？
答案是B，可我怎么觉得B中的exclude应该换成include?

dorbear

[face=Verdana]Exclude 和 Include 是相对而言的：

如果问题要求找到 Flaw in the conclusion, 则固定住推理，结论还应该包含"baking soda" mislabel 的情形。这时(B)中应该用Include 替换 Exclude 才能成为答案；
如果问题要求找到 Flaw in the reasoning（如本题）, 则固定住结论，推理中需要排除 "baking soda" mislabel 的情况才能得到这个结论。这是应该用Exclude。[/face]

shellyaaa

哇！！谢谢dorbear！我搞清楚了。没有注意到 Flow in the conclusion & Flaw in the reasoning的差别。

missing_80

好贴