再问一题，feifei 47---还是程度的选择！！！

47.
                            High school students who feel that they are not succeeding in school often drop out before graduating and go to work. Last year, however, the city’s high school dropout rate was significantly lower than the previous year’s rate. This is encouraging evidence that the program instituted two years ago to improve the morale of high school students has begun to take effect to reduce dropouts.

Which one of the following, if true about the last year, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) There was a recession that caused a high level or unemployment in the city.

(B) The morale of students who dropped out of high school had been low even before they reached high school.

(C) As in the preceding year, more high school students remained in school than dropped out.

(D) High schools in the city established placement offices to assist their graduates in obtaining employment.

(E) The antidropout program was primarily aimed at improving students’ morale in those high schools with the highest dropout rates.

类似于feifei 76，我对这道题weaken程度的把握也很疑惑。。觉得B也是不错的选项啊，但究竟在程度上比正确选项A好在哪里呢？

请nn 释疑！谢谢

weaken很多情况下是找外因，也就是说题目中给的是A-->B, 但实际上是C-->B。
这个题就是这样一种情况。你好好理解一下，B是典型的无关选项。文中讨论的是program可不可以improve morale，而dropout进学校前的morale是怎样是无关的。

weaken还有一种常见的是题目中是A-->B,但实际上确是B-->A。

楼上的分析有所启示，但小女驽钝，对逻辑中的无关选项总是缺乏鉴别能力。

说说我对B选项的理解：如果学生在进校前 dropout的morale 就很低，那么题中所说的the program instituted two years ago 就没有其宣称的效果——这难道不是削弱么？

请指教！！

(B) The morale of students who dropped out of high school had been low even before they reached high school.

B is wrong for the following reason:

whatever happen to the students a long time ago has nothing to do with the argument, which focuses on the drop out rate this year. Furthermore, choice B even supports the argument a little bit.

Here ，the logical chain is very clear

Background information is listed at the beginning of the argument ,that is ,students who feel unsuccessful will leave out of the school to work .And then ,another fact is expressed by author is that the rate for dropout is sibnificantly decreased ,finally,from such reason ,one conclusion is made that one unknown program put into effect for such great improvement.

what is the weaken directions here ?

1.such program does not do its job

2.student has nothing to do but stay in school

3.that is the rate of dropout decrease caused such program success not the vise versa

4.there is some other reason for such great improvement

5.the rate is not as exactly as that the school cited

here A is equal to num2 above.

============================================

in Choice B has nothing to do with the argument.the morale of students is a new element introduced by the choice B.So just focus on what the argument really focus.

TO gonghao 斑斑：

你的意思是，对于一道逻辑题，应首先根据题目的叙述理清其逻辑链，然后根据逻辑链上的成分寻找可能的削弱/加强 点。 逻辑链上没有的成分则无疑成为无关选项

不知道我的理解是否正确。。。发现自己做逻辑题的方法还存在问题！！

millions of thanks for all your directions above!!

以下是引用jenny22在2006-8-26 23:37:00的发言：

TO gonghao 斑斑：

你的意思是，对于一道逻辑题，应首先根据题目的叙述理清其逻辑链，然后根据逻辑链上的成分寻找可能的削弱/加强 点。 逻辑链上没有的成分则无疑成为无关选项

不知道我的理解是否正确。。。发现自己做逻辑题的方法还存在问题！！

millions of thanks for all your directions above!!

Some part of your points absolutely right.The whole process of the inferational meansurement is the key to the CR question.But,in weaken questions,you can use another cause to refute the conclusion made by author .At this time ,actually ,you can not say that the cause,whcih has not been cited in the argument ,is not the answer any more because its irrelevant.

In some infer/conclud/imply/be supported questions ,the irrelevant tools are always used and reslut in very good resluts.But in weaken ,for example,such tools has not as good performance as those do in kinds of questions mentioned above.So just adapt to the patten of the questions ,and then get familiar with them throughly.