assumption能用无因无果&有因有果么？个人感觉不能。希望发现能的同学进来贴下题目！大家一起来讨论！

ageng · 发表于 2011-6-5 22:36:24

如题。很多总结里说：因果结构的题目可以用“无因无果&有因有果”作为假设。但我集中做了些假设题，没发现这种题目。用“排除他因和因果未颠倒”倒很多。我个人也认为“无因无果&有因有果”不能作为假设。因为“无因无果&有因有果”相当于重复原文的废话。加强题此种方法很常见。而假设题一般不会用这种“废话”作正确答案吧。以上是个人做题过程中的一点想法。希望发现有与我想法想法，即--“无因无果&有因有果”作为假设题目的同学贴出原题来。大家一起讨论下。

Joseph_lin · 发表于 2011-6-6 15:55:57

你对这两个东西取非都可以使原结论不成立，所以应该可以算假设项的吧

Dianakisscat · 发表于 2011-6-7 15:42:11

给LZ贴一道题，呵呵。我对这道题也是表示很无语。

Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive（怀恨的） desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

A.   Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B.   The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C.   The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D.   The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E.   Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

Dianakisscat · 发表于 2011-6-7 15:43:12

这道题可以算是“重复了原文”。
因为排除明显无关的ACD后，E一眼就进入了我的选择范围，不假思索就选了。但是E是错的。

ageng · 发表于 2011-6-7 16:54:53

这道题可以算是“重复了原文”。
因为排除明显无关的ACD后，E一眼就进入了我的选择范围，不假思索就选了。但是E是错的。

-- by 会员 Dianakisscat (2011/6/7 15:43:12)

呵呵。我觉得，B是排除他因。因为有可能report中被认为wasteful的project你president's party的更多。没准全是wasteful的。对立党被cancel的是wasteful，president's party可能很多没有被cancel的也是wasteful。这样的话vindictive是存在的。
所以B是针对report的排除他因。好像没哪重复原文把~E才是无关呢。

ageng · 发表于 2011-6-7 17:05:03

你对这两个东西取非都可以使原结论不成立，所以应该可以算假设项的吧

-- by 会员 Joseph_lin (2011/6/6 15:55:57)

本来我跟你一样的想法。但是现在觉得也不一定。一定要有例子才好证明。我之所以贴这个帖子是因为我用无因无果&有因有果的思路做错了好几个题。而且如果陷入无因无果&有因有果的思路很难发现自己错了。要是大家能贴出自己遇到的例子就好了~我个人认为，assumption是非常严谨的。argument一般是有gap或者有漏洞。正确选项是搭桥或者排除他因。而无因无果&有因有果对于assumption没什么意义。。。如果我的想法能得到求证，大家做assumption题目时就能避免进入误区啊。

Dianakisscat · 发表于 2011-6-8 14:36:45

其实我做CR已经没有特别的去套到底是有因无果还是啥啥啥的~

就是把自己想象成在辩论的人，支持自己或者推倒别人，就欧了~

呵呵~

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2012-CR-59 | TN-14-CR-2 (MGAW)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

assumption能用无因无果&有因有果么？个人感觉不能。希望发现能的同学进来贴下题目！大家一起来讨论！

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()