ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants two years ago. Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly. Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

正确答案: C

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2517|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

【请教GWD 一道逻辑题的答案~】

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-3-3 21:48:42 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Q37: TTGWD4-Q11:
Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants two years ago.  Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly.  Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause.
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain-processing plants.
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nerve damage.











这题目选的是C,我在BC中犹豫了很久.....用的是取非后削弱文章来做,B选项说有一种化学物质能对人类完全无伤害,这不是削弱了文章的结论:不是错误的认为ed有问题就是新的化学物质也能引起疾病 吗? 感觉B削弱了后一个部分(新的化学物质也能引起疾病),而C削弱了前一部分(错误的认为ed有问题),实在不明白要怎么排除??请求帮忙谢谢!~~~
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2010-3-3 21:51:12 | 只看该作者
顶~
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2010-3-6 19:26:07 | 只看该作者
up~~
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2010-3-6 19:26:37 | 只看该作者
帮帮忙~~~
5#
发表于 2010-3-6 21:40:49 | 只看该作者
饿 直接看C选项吧。。。 挺直接的。说是建立在 这种神经损伤两年就能观察出来  这个假设上。   否则 这个结论就不成立 。。。比较明显。。
其他选项就无视了。。。。
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:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-9 03:48
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