GWD25－3-请教一道逻辑

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best

Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has

done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with

a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat:  No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few

judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative

effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A.     attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members

of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.

B.     mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change

C.     attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely

by pointing to the absence of negative effects

D.     simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support

of that denial

E.      assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group

necessarily benefit all members of that group.

参考答案是A，本人觉得C也并无不妥。

以前有过很多讨论，但还是没有定论，请教到底是A还是C？谢谢

SUPPORT A

I think C is point to a good aspect but the inadequate ones.It is a right way to stand positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effect .There is nothing to blame.

In A,the mothod Pat used has it's flaw.In choice A ,it has been pointed out very clear and at a right way.

但是我还是不清楚究竟a 指出什么逻辑谬～也就是a是什么意思？

给为能解释一下吗？

试图通过对一个变化对现在情况的影响来说明对未来情况的影响

就象AA里的七宗罪，过去怎样了不能代表未来的发展趋势；题目里就是现在very few

judges teach or give lectures不能说明以后

支持A,这题是围绕加工资的有效性来说的，不是BAN的有效性～

M加工资没作用，因为BAN禁止讲座。

F加工资有作用，因为现在很少J去讲座，BAN将来没有消极作用。

C讲一个变化的积极作用通过说它没有消极作用。

这里的变化是指的要不要加工资，而不是要不要取消BAN。