GWD-1-Q18 老讨论帖我顶不起来了 是一个evaluation的问题困惑已久 谢谢大家 速回啊 谢谢大家！

jianaozhonghua

GWD1-Q18:

It is illegal to advertise prescription medications in Hedland except in professional medical journals or by mail directly to physicians.A proposed law would allow general advertising of prescription medications.Opponents object that, in general, laypersons lack the specialized knowledge to evaluate such advertisements and might ask their physicians for inappropriate medications.But since physicians have the final say as to whether to prescribe a medication for a patient, the objection provides no grounds for concern.



Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the argument?



A.Whether nonprescription medications can interact with and block the action of any prescription medications that could be advertised to the general public

B.Whether most prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would be advertisements for recently developed medications newly available by prescription

C.Whether prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would appear on television and radio as well as in print

D.Whether physicians are more likely to pay attention to advertising directed to the general public than to advertising directed to physicians

E.Whether physicians are likely to succumb to pressure from patients to prescribe inappropriate medications



顶起这个帖子，是因为不了解evaluation题的做法：
如果我说了医生给开，那么反对无效，是个正确选项。
如果我说了医生不给开，那么反对有效，是不是也是个正确选项呢？？
因为我觉得好像evaluation只要是能让题目的结论是个完整的结论就行了，无论weaken或者support？！？ 谢谢大家了！！

jianaozhonghua

顶

Thruth

To evaluate an argument is by no means to judge whether the conclusion is right or wrong.
而是看给出的条件是否相关，能否直接成为推理的隐含前提。
选E.