|
In response to mounting public concern, an airplane manufacturer implemented a program with the well-publicized goal of reducing by half the total yearly amount of hazardous waste generated by its passenger-jet division. When the program began in 1994, the division's hazardous waste output was 90 pounds per production worker; last year it was 40 pounds per production worker. Clearly, therefore, charges that the manufacturer's program has not met its goal are false. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? A. The amount of nonhazardous waste generated each year by the passenger-jet division has not increased significantly since 1994. B. At least as many passenger jets were produced by the division last year as had been produced in 1994. C. Since 1994, other divisions in the company have achieved reductions in hazardous waste output that are at least equal to that achieved in the passenger-jet division. D. The average number of weekly hours per production worker in the passenger-jet division was not significantly greater last year than it was in 1994. E. The number of production workers assigned to the passenger-jet division was not significantly less in 1994 than it was last year.
这道题的答案是E很明显，但是我对C选项表示有点疑问，搜了一些帖子发现没有对C选项有疑问的==
破解版对C的解释是：C.从1994年以来，其它部门排污的减少量至少和客机制造部门的一样。该选项涉及了“果”的一个特点，但是不是能产生“果”的其它原因。
我认为C选项的错误点不是如上所说，我认为这是削弱了。
前提中的变化关系是： “减排计划施行 工人平均排污（危险的）减少” 结论中的因果关系是： “减排计划（因）导致工人平均排污（危险的）减少（果）”
我认为不能简单的说是减排计划使得人均排污量下降，准确的说应该是客机制造部的减排计划使得人均减排量下降，其他部门的排污量变化同样会影响到人均排污量的变化。如果C说的是 其它部门排污的减少量不比客机制造部门的多，那么就可以作为选项，因为他去掉了一个可以他因解释人均排污量减少的原因。
请问我这样的想法有问题吗？谢谢解答了
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2014-10-13 12:34:15
收藏
收藏
楼主
