lsat-28-2-12

qiqisu · 发表于 2004-11-4 15:58:00

12. The higher the average fat intake among the residents of a country, the higher the incidence of cancer in that country; the lower the average fat intake, the lower the incidence of cancer. So individuals who want to reduce their risk of cancer should reduce their fat intake.

Which one of the following, if true, most weaken the argument?

(A) The differences in average fat intake between countries are often due to the varying makeup of traditional diets.

(B) The countries with a high average fat intake tend to be among the wealthiest in the world.

(C) Cancer is a prominent cause of death in countries with a low average fat intake.

(D) The countries with high average fat intake are also the countries with highest levels of environmental pollutionhave.

(E) An individual resident of a country whose population has a high average fat intake may have a diet with a low fat intake.

答案是D，为什么E不对，D没有说highest levels of environmental pollution就会致癌呀，而D中，恰恰说了，个人的脂肪摄入量低并不等于国家会有低的脂肪平均摄入量，也就是说明了，个人的脂肪摄入量和癌症的发病率并没有直接关系。所以weaken the argument。。。请各位帮忙解释一下。谢谢。。

cranberry · 发表于 2004-11-4 16:23:00

d暗示了他因的存在，e和题目无关，确实无关，generalization的结论和个体的性状一点关系也没有

sunday_zhou · 发表于 2004-11-4 21:20:00

我觉得此题的推理应该是：摄入高（低）＝》得癌的可能性高（低）＝》规避癌症要减少摄入量。

D有暗示的作用：摄入量高和环境污染高是作为两个同样的因素出现在得癌可能性高的国家里。如果没有其他supporting的话，那么不能肯定就是前者导致了得癌（有点像作文模版了。。。）

同意cranberry关于E的解释。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-4 21:20:54编辑过]

Bensontuo · 发表于 2019-8-8 17:28:52

qiqisu 发表于 2004-11-4 15:58
12.   The higher the average fat intake among the residents of a country, the higher the i ...

Spot the question type: Weaken

1. correlation to prove causation - wrong

2. spot the core of the argument - necessary assumption

Higher the fat ---> Higher the cancer, Lower the fat ---> Lower the cancer

So lower the cancer ---> Lower the fat ( Mistaken Reverse )

prediction the answer to be weaken the argument

For those who lower the cancer do not necessary lower the fat.

Let us dive into the question:

A. it does not either approve or disapprove the argument above

B. Also, its not about whether people are wealthy or not

C. It does not prove anything, what if in given countries we do have 200 people as total with only 5 people pass way, and 4 of them died of cancer; however, the rest of 195 people with low fat intake does not have any sighs of getting cancer. Could you determine anything ?

D. It does offer the other possible cause that it " might " be the pollution causing the cancer, and if true that, the it must be also true that there might be possibilities pollution can cause cancer and the correlations of the question might be incorrect.

E. It does not really relevant to the argument, please think in this way, can you determine 100% that he will definitely lowering the possibility to get cancer ? The core of the argument is !!

" Lowering the risk of getting cancer must guarantee lowering the risk of getting fat " and the necessary assumption is the correlation must be true and without any variables.

lsat-28-2-12

lsat-28-2-12

lsat-28-2-12

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()