ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2480|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-12-4-18

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-11-3 22:18:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-12-4-18

Questions 17-18


Teacher: Journalists who conceal the identity of the sources they quote stake their professional reputations on what may be called the logic of anecdotes. This is so because the statements reported by such journalists are dissociated from the precise circumstances in which they were made and thus will be accepted for publication only if the statements are high in plausibility or originality or interest to a given audience—precisely the properties of a good anecdote.


Student: But what you are saying, then, is that the journalist need not bother with sources in the first place. Surely, any reasonably resourceful journalist can invent plausible, original, or interesting stories faster than they can be obtained from unidentified sources.


18.   Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the teacher’s argument?


(A) A journalist undermines his or her own professional standing by submitting for publication statements that, not being attributed to a named source, are rejected for being implausible, unoriginal, or dull.


(B) Statements that are attributed to a fully identified source make up the majority of reported statements included by journalists in stories submitted for publication.


(C) Reported statements that are highly original will often seem implausible unless submitted by a journalist who is known for solid, reliable work.


(D) Reputable journalists sometimes do not conceal the identity of their sources from their publishers but insist that the identity of those sources be concealed from the public.(A)


(E) Journalists who have special access to sources whose identity they must conceal are greatly valued by their publishers.


原文有点没读懂,能不能麻烦讲一讲,谢谢!!!


沙发
发表于 2004-11-3 22:31:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-12-4-18

在报道关于anecdotes的逻辑时,记者没说明引用的来源这种做法是对他们的职业信誉冒险。因为它和其背景隔离开来,所以只有在满足3个条件之一时才会被接受:high in plausibility or originality or interest to a given audience。(结论)。A其实是举个例。所以支持

板凳
发表于 2019-8-8 17:09:29 | 只看该作者
ninaluan 发表于 2004-11-3 22:18
Questions 17-18Teacher: Journalists who conceal the identity of the sources they quote stake their p ...

教授說:記者隱藏自己報導來源的出處會賭上自己的職業名聲, 因為這些記者報導的故事跟詳細情況是毫無連結的, 所以如果這些故事可以出版, 其必然是高度可信, 或是高度原創, 或是這些故事讀者高度感興趣的

學生說:但是照你如此所說, 那麼, 這些記者必然不用去找出處, 確實低, 任何可理論低會利用資源低記者可以發明實用, 原創, 或是有趣的故事比較上他們取得這些故事從尚未辨認的出處。

教授是在敘述一件事情的情況, 教授的辯證很簡單:

“ 如果這樣的情況發生了, 這些被隱藏出處的故事假使要被讀者接受, 其必定要有至少一個必要條件從三個必要條件 1. 高度真實性, 2. 高度原創性, 3. 高度的讀者興趣

那學生的辯證呢?

當然, 只要是理論上而言地很會利用資源地記者, 其需要時間來發明教授所講的三個必要條件的故事必定比從出處來找這三個故事還來得少,  所以這些記者必然不會花時間找出處


當然, 教授的結論是某一件事情假使發生, 而這件事情發生要被接受的必要條件為何, 可是學生直接把這件事情要被接受的必要條件當作充分條件來推翻此事情必然不會發生 ( 他們沒必要去藏出處, 因為它們自己發明故事就好了)

犯的錯誤為, 1. Mistaken reverse. 2. 預先假定此類狀況不會發生

*重點來了, 假設這類狀況不會發生並不影響這類狀況發生之後會被接受的必要條件是否會變動。意思就是, 要是這類狀況真的發生了, 學生的辯證就會被推翻。

所以學生忽略了去討論, 這類狀況發生下的情況。

好, 十八題我們要討論的事情是, 如何加強老師的辯證

老師的辯證為 - 假使不傷及其名譽, 其必然要假使要被接受, 其必然要有至少一個必要條件從三個必要條件之中,

那現在A選項很直白地告訴你, 這三個必要條件只要至少一個取非就會充分的傷及其名譽, 其實就是老師辯證的逆否命題。

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:

所属分类: 法学院申请

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-1-9 06:19
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部