LSAT-12-4-9

Questions 8-9

That long-term cigarette smoking can lead to health problems including cancer and lung disease is a scientifically well-established fact. Contrary to what many people seem to believe, however, it is not necessary to deny this fact in order to reject the view that tobacco companies should be held either morally or legally responsible for the poor health of smokers. After all, excessive consumption of candy undeniably leads to such health problems as tooth decay, but no one seriously believes that candy eaters who get cavities should be able to sue candy manufacturers.

9. The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

(A) fails to establish that the connection between tooth decay and candy eating is as scientifically well documented as that between smoking and the health problems suffered by smokers

(B) depends on the obviously false assumption that everyone who gets cavities does so only as a result of eating too much candy

(C) leaves undefined such critical qualifying terms as "excessive" and "long-term"

(D) attributes certain beliefs to "many people" without identifying the people who allegedly hold those beliefs

(E) fails to address the striking differences in the nature of the threat to health posed by tooth decay on the one hand and cancer

不解，请NN提示思路

文章用了类比，作者承认吸烟导致癌症或者别的疾患，但认为因为只有长期吸烟才导致，所以烟草企业没有责任，理由是长期吃糖导致蛀牙，但没人因为蛀牙而起诉糖果公司。

对类比的最好的削弱就是类比的不恰当，e是答案吧。

我认为B

long-term与excessive是分别是　时间与数量的词

D中differences in the nature of the threat to health ，文章好象没有体现 the nature of the threat 的区别，也许有暗示，但明白地说　区别却没有的

请cranberrry 兄，讨论，呵呵，当然楼主公布答案还是更好

不好意思，我打字打错了，我想的，和举的例子都是C，但写成B了，耽误layer1　版主了，惭愧

老大们同意E，我还是相信的，一定慢慢体会