|
[size=9.000000pt]The cause of the wreck of the ship Edmund Fitzgerald in a severe storm on Lake Superior is still unknown. When thesunken wreckage of the vessel was found, searchers discovered the hull in two pieces lying close together. The[size=9.000000pt]storm‘s violent waves would have caused separate pieces floating even briefly on the surface to drift apart. Therefore,[size=9.000000pt]the breakup of the hull can be ruled out as the cause of the sinking. [size=9.000000pt]Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?[size=9.000000pt]
[size=9.000000pt]A：Ships as large as the Edmund Fitzgerald rarely sink except in the most violent weather.
[size=9.000000pt]B Underwater currents at the time of the storm did not move the separated pieces of the hull together again. [size=9.000000pt]
[size=9.000000pt]C Pieces of the hull would have sunk more quickly than the intact hull would have.
[size=9.000000pt]D The waves of the storm were not violent enough to have caused the ship to break up on the surface.
[size=9.000000pt]E if the ship broke up before sinking, the pieces of the hull would not have remained on the surface for very long.
发现逻辑难题就难在题干不好理解。这个题的逻辑链就是“发现船骸的时候，船体是连在一起的。巨浪会使得已经分开的东西离的更远” 推出结论”船体破坏不是沉船的原因。“
如果船体在海面上就已经因为巨浪变成了两半，那这两半船体只会离的越来越远。然而现在发现了在一起的船体，说明沉船的时候船体就没有碎，所以才得出了这样的结论。
A 明显无关
B 取反，暗流把碎了的船体又和在了一起一起，加强了船体碎了导致沉船的可能性，削弱结论，对
C 无关比较
D 取反，海浪很大，导致船体在海面上碎了。那么，按照题目逻辑船体只随着大浪相互离的越来越远，怎么可能发现连在一起的船体？？跟题目中的事实”发现了连在一起的船体“相斥，无法削弱！
E 取反，如果船沉前船体就坏了，碎片会在海面上呆很久。呆多久都没关系，反正你在海上碎了就会飘的越来越远，跟D一样的逻辑，无法削弱
求交流指正
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2018-1-19 21:02:21
收藏
收藏
楼主