请哪位大牛来解释一下这道逻辑题

樱桃和豌豆 · 发表于 2013-4-14 22:32:58

A group of children of various ages was read stories inwhich people caused harm, some of those people doing so intentionally, and someaccidentally. When asked about appropriate punishments for those who had causedharm, the younger children, unlike the older ones, assigned punishments thatdid not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally oraccidentally. Younger children, then, do not regard people’s intentions asrelevant to punishment.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriouslyweaken the conclusion above?

(A) In interpreting these stories, the listeners had todraw on a relatively mature sense of human psychology in order to tell whetherharm was produced intentionally or accidentally.

(B) In these stories, the severity of the harm producedwas clearly stated.

(C) Younger children are as likely to produce harmunintentionally as are older children.

(D) The older children assigned punishment in a way thatclosely resembled the way adults had assigned punishment in a similarexperiment. A

(E) The younger children assigned punishments that variedaccording to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.

主P推C是什么，一直找不到，请哪位大牛帮忙找一下主P和C，再讲解一下解题思路。谢谢~

mamaliang · 发表于 2013-4-15 11:44:27

试着解释一下哈，正确答案应该是A吧？

Premise: younger children assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally or accidentally. (小孩子在判定惩罚的时候不会根据事件是有意或者无意而变化)
Conclusion: younger children do not regard people's intentions as relevant to punishment. (小孩子在定罚的时候不会考虑行使人的意图)
Question: Weaken the conclusion

思路：
在从premise推出结论的过程中，有这么一个assumption: younger children can discern whether the harm was done interntionally or accidentally. (小孩子可以区别这个伤害是有意还是无意为之)。

如果我们能够expose a faulty assumption, 我们就能weaken the conclusion. (assumption错误，就不能推出结论)
A. listeners had to draw on a relatively mature sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally. (listeners要有一个比较成熟的心智才能区别出伤害是有意还是无意为之). 这样就直指错误的assumption，因为小孩子没有成熟的心智，所以不能区别是否是有意。那么结论：younger children do not regard people's intentions as relevant to punishment就不能成立。

B. the severity of the harm produced was clearly stated - strengthen the conclusion or irrelevant.
C. Younger children are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are older children - irrelevant (与小孩子produce harm无关)
D. older children assigned punishment in a way that closely resembled the way adults had assigned punishment in a similar experiment. (与older children怎样assigned punishment无关，况且这里没有告诉how adults assigned the punishment)
E. younger children assigned punishments that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories - strengthen the conclusion (因为younger children定罚的标准是severity of the harm而不是intention)

不知道我有没有解释清楚啊~~

hellotomi · 发表于 2013-4-15 13:09:35

请问E为什么错了？

樱桃和豌豆 · 发表于 2013-4-15 16:23:35

mamaliang 发表于 2013-4-15 11:44
试着解释一下哈，正确答案应该是A吧？

Premise: younger children assigned punishments that did not var ...

谢谢~~~当时我的思路是这样的，由C也能推迟P，所以是现象解释文，因为是现象解释文，所以P和C之间的联系错，找他因，所有就选了E。后来看了您的解释，也觉得很合理，就不太清楚这种题该怎么做了

mamaliang · 发表于 2013-4-15 21:52:22

hellotomi 发表于 2013-4-15 13:09
请问E为什么错了？

这题的结论是：Younger children do not regard people’s intentions as relevant to punishment. (小孩子在定罚的时候不会考虑行使人的意图)
E选项The younger children assigned punishments that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories - 小孩子定罚的依据是伤害的严重程度，这就说明依据不是行使人的意图。这是在加强结论，而不是削弱结论。

mamaliang · 发表于 2013-4-15 21:59:10

樱桃和豌豆发表于 2013-4-15 16:23
谢谢~~~当时我的思路是这样的，由C也能推迟P，所以是现象解释文，因为是现象解释文，所以P和C之间的联系 ...

我是看的manhattan的CR，它上面没有把题型分的这么详细。所以我不太知道现象解释文应该采取什么套路。
manhattan把这一类的都归为是weaken the conclusion的题型，正确选项一般都是：
1. exposes a faulty or tenuous assumption
2. negatively impacts the conclusion directly
这题就属于第一种情况。

至于这一题，你说“找他因”我觉得有点问题。因为原文的conclusion就是一个否定句（否定了一种原因），如果你是找他因的话就是支持了这个conclusion（说明确实存在他因导致结论）。
如果原文的结论是一个肯定的conclusion，比如Younger children regard people’s intentions as relevant to punishment. 那你找到别的原因，也许就可以negatively impacts the conclusion directly。

樱桃和豌豆 · 发表于 2013-4-16 11:44:29

mamaliang 发表于 2013-4-15 21:59
我是看的manhattan的CR，它上面没有把题型分的这么详细。所以我不太知道现象解释文应该采取什么套路。
ma ...

谢谢~我又仔细看了现象解释文，这道题不属于。所以思路错了

本贴相关题目 OG (CGLU)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

[逻辑小分队] 请哪位大牛来解释一下这道逻辑题

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()