LSAT15-2-10-->bigmouse转移

sammen · 发表于 2005-6-15 20:13:00

10. The government of Penglai, an isolated island, proposed eliminating outdoor adverting except for small signs of standard shape that identify places of business. Some island merchants protested that the law would reduce the overall volume of business in Penglai, pointing to a report done by the government indicating that in every industry the Penglai businesses that used outdoor advertising had a larger market share than those that did not.

Which one of the following describes an error of reasoning in the merchants' argument?

(A) presupposing that there are no good reasons for restricting the use of outdoor advertising in Penglai.

(B) Assuming without giving justification that the outdoor advertising increased market share by some means other than by diverting trader form competing businesses.

(C) Ignoring the question of whether the government's survey of the island could be objective.

(D) Failing to establish whether the market-share advantage enjoyed by businesses employing outdoor advertising was precisely.

(E) Disregarding the possibility that the government's proposed restrictions are unconstitutional.

答案是B，我选的是D，D哪里错了啊？谢谢解答。

chelseayang · 发表于 2005-6-16 03:28:00

D is not an error of reasoning in the merchants'argument because the merchants never argue that the report done by the government indicates blah blah. rather, the stimulus states, as a matter of fact, that the report indicates blah blah.

sammen · 发表于 2005-6-17 21:07:00

明白了，谢谢

LSAT15-2-10-->bigmouse转移

LSAT15-2-10

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()