ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2465|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-16-2-14

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-7-23 10:34:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-16-2-14

Pedigreed dogs, including those officially classified as working dogs, must conform to standards set by organizations that issue pedigrees. Those standards generally specify the physical appearance necessary for a dog to be recognized as belonging to a breed but stipulate nothing about other genetic traits, such as those that enable breeds originally developed as working dogs to perform the work for which they were developed. Since dog breeders try to maintain only those traits specified by pedigree organizations, and traits that breeders do not try to maintain risk being lost, certain traits like herding ability risk being lost among pedigreed dogs. Therefore, pedigree organizations should set standards requiring working ability in pedigreed dogs classified as working dogs.


14. The phrase "certain traits like herding ability risk being lost among pedigreed dogs" serves which one of the following functions in the argument?


(A) It is a claim on which the argument depends but for which no support is given.


(B) It is a subsidiary conclusion used in support of the main conclusion.


(C) It acknowledges a possible objection to the proposal put forth in the argument.


(D) It summarizes the position that the argument as a whole is directed toward discrediting.


(E) It provides evidence necessary to support a claim stated earlier in the argument.



the key is b, but i couldn't recognize this "certain traits like..." ,which is a phrase that example sentences usually start with, as a "subsidiary 【conclusion】" as in the choice B.


I chose E.





沙发
发表于 2004-7-23 13:29:00 | 只看该作者

B is right.

"Subsidiary conclusion" is another name for "Intermediary conclusion".

The argument's line of reasoning is as follows:

Evidence 1 (E1): "dog breeders try to maintain only those traits specified by pedigree organizations",

Evidence 2 (E2): "traits that breeders do not try to maintain risk being lost"

Intermediary conclusion (IC): "certain traits like herding ability risk being lost among pedigreed dogs"

Final conclusion (FC): "pedigree organizations should set standards requiring working ability in pedigreed dogs classified as working dogs"

E1 + E2 --> IC --> FC

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-7-23 16:00:00 | 只看该作者
isn't that example an evidence to support the claim stated earlier? or can't E2 be seen as a claim?
地板
发表于 2004-7-24 02:07:00 | 只看该作者
Whehter a statement is an evidence or a conclusion all depends on how the author present it and the argument's logic line of reasoning.  E1 and E2 are presented as evidence matter-of-factly by the author.
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2004-7-24 07:32:00 | 只看该作者

ic~thax lar.

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-7-28 20:59
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部