LSAT-14-4-4【generating facilities】

pocahontas · 发表于 2004-7-29 16:51:00

Kim: Some people claim that the battery-powered electric car represents a potential solution to the problem of air pollution. But they forget that it takes electricity to recharge batteries and that most of our electricity is generated by burning polluting fossil fuels. Increasing the number of electric cars on the road would require building more generating facilities since current facilities are operating at maximum capacity. So even if all of the gasoline-powered cars on the roads today were replaced by electric cars, it would at best be an exchange of one source of fossil-fuel pollution for another

4. Which one of the following is an assumption on which Kim's argument depends?

(A) Replacing gasoline-powered cars with battery-powered electric cars will lead to a net increase in the total number of cars on the road

(B) Gasoline-powered cars are currently not the most significant source of fossil-fuel pollution

(C) Replacing gasoline-powered cars with battery-powered electric cars is justified only if electric cars produce less air pollution

(D) While it is being operated, a battery-powered electric car does not cause any significant air pollution

(E) At least some of the generating facilities built to meet the demand for electricity for battery-powered electric cars would be of a type that burns fossil fuel

key's e.
e是怎么体现的呀？

blackhorse · 发表于 2004-7-29 21:06:00

花了几分钟，最后选了E（没有看答案的情况下）。我是排除法选的。

看到E中有个“some”我的眼镜一亮，再看内容，就是他了。在第一遍看完题干，有个印象就是“most、more”等表示数量的一个相对的概念，当时想选项应该有对应的词。

当然，我的解题思路是排除法。用的思路就是选项表达的意思一定是符合原文的中心意思。A、B、c、d都可以看成无关，说的都是另外一回事。

lawyer_1 · 发表于 2004-7-29 21:54:00

原文逻辑：换用电池车，就必须增加电厂（目前的电厂烧污染煤），所以空气污染增加。E取非是新增的电厂全部不烧污染煤。这样空气污染就不会增加，结论推不出。故为ASSUMPTION

pocahontas · 发表于 2004-7-31 10:08:00

got it.thax!!!

Bensontuo · 发表于 2019-8-2 17:47:08

pocahontas 发表于 2004-7-29 16:51
Kim: Some people claim that the battery-powered electric car represents a potential solution to the ...

Spot the question type: Necessary Assumption

Core of the argument

P1: Most of our E in car is generated by burning fossil fuels

P2: Increasing the number of E cars on the road would require building more generating facilities, since current facilities are operating at maximum capacity.

C: So even if all of the gasoline-powered cars on the roads today were replaced by electric cars, it would at best be an exchange of one source of fossil -pollution for another.

what might be the correct necessary assumptions here ?

1. The facilities built for E-car would be required to burn fossil fuels.

2. There are no any other alternatives forms of the energy to charge the current E-cars.

3. There are no any current facilities could be operating lower than maximum level.

Let us dive into the answer.

A. If there are a net increase in the total number of cars on the road, it will reduce the current air pollution; however, it would be necessary to prove that it would at best be an exchange of one source of fossil-fuel pollution for another.

B. As long as you see the options containing " not primarily ", " not most ", " not the best of ", not the first of "... it won't be the answer of LSAT LR question, since you can't be prove the argument by claiming the priority of it.

C. whether it is justified or not does not really relevant to the core of the argument -> the air pollutions reduced from E-car will be exactly the same as the air pollution increased from burning the fossil fuels.

D. The same, we are not discussing whether E car will cause more air pollution or not; instead, we are examining whether the amount of air pollution it reduce is equal to the amount of which it requires from burning the fossil.

E. Negate it " none of the facilities built to meet the demands is of a type that burns fossil fuel - > Well, iit perfectly refute the original argument. -> perfect answer.

LSAT-14-4-4【generating facilities】

LSAT-14-4-4【generating facilities】

LSAT-14-4-4【generating facilities】

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()