一战前接触Helr，时间不够就没有仔细研究。现在准备二战了，准备用Helr的方法来过一遍rc，做题的时候发现“只要选项中没有提到xx就排除”／“选项中一定要出现xx”这样的标准很奇怪呀。
比如在方案推理里，错误的选项说“因为没有提到该方案所以错”，这个ok；但是正确的选项也没有提到为什么就对了呢？
比如prep08第86题：
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about the financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because __________.
A. they rely entirely on the government pension for their income B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check C. they buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation D. the pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high E. in Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living
题目答案是E，这个选项也并没有提到推理文段中的方案，Helr的解释是：Runagian国的孩子会给自己的父母以生活补助，但是仅仅是到父母可以有一个很好的生活为止。本选项提到了方案的可行性，即，如果父母的钱由很多部分组成，当某一部分的钱增多的时候，另一部分钱会下降，那么父母的总体钱数不一定会有变化（no better off），所以本选项可以削弱方案推理。
觉得这个标准有点像是双重标准一样，对错误的选项就用它斩立决，对的选项就去解释其他原因，好奇怪。
有NN能帮忙解释一下吗？ | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2015-9-15 17:32:44
收藏
收藏
楼主