Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too lowto attract the best candidates to the job. The legislature’s（立法机关） move to raise the salary has donenothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban onreceiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise insalary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or givelectures, 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 willaffect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the currentmembers.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be aneffect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will havea positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward anyevidence in support of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of agroup necessarily benefit all members of thatgroup.
题目讨论的是新措施——增加薪水且禁止演讲收费——对吸引候选人竞争法官职位的影响--->也就是说：错误类比！
A，Pat 用现有法官赚外快的比例不多来推断候选人中赚外快的比例也不多
C，Pat 通过除去新政中的不利影响来说明新政是成功的
明显 A 才是 Pat 的推理错误。
Pat 没有表明要除去 ban（不利因素），只说了 ban 对现有法官基本没有影响，并以此为基础推断潜在候选人基本也不受 Ban 的影响
因此选 A
现在我可以理解A，但是理解不了C的不对。上面的是说“Pat 通过除去新政中的不利影响来说明新政是成功的”，但是我觉得C的意思是“PAT通过指出负面影响的不存在而证明有正面影响”，然后我就觉得特别特别对……当时做的时候看到C就认定了，都没犹豫~~~我现在有点不知道C的意思到底是什么，逻辑真心就是考阅读能力啊~~
请大家帮我讲讲C~~~十分感谢的！！！！
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-10-7 14:12:53
收藏
收藏
楼主