狒狒逻辑一道题求解~~~！

naryi · 发表于 2012-12-4 23:28:04

73. There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published. There is a system in place for the confirmation or disconfirmation of scientific findings, namely, the replication of results by other scientists. Poor scientific work on the part of any one scientists, which can include anything from careless reporting practices to fraud, is not harmful. It will beexposed and rendered harmless when other scientists conduct experiments and obtain disconfirmatory results.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument?

A. Scientific experiments can go unchallenged for many years before they are replicated.

B. Most scientists work in universities, where their work is submitted to peer review before publication.

C. Most scientists are under pressure to make their work accessible to the scrutiny of replication.

D. In scientific experiments, careless reporting is more common than fraud.

E. Most scientists work as part of a team rather than alone.

答案：A

思路：作者说no必要有一个新的出版confirmation系统，因为Poor scientific work is not harmful，other scientists conduct experiments来证明正确的结果。A指出Scientific experiments can go unchallenged for many years，指出Poor scientific work is harmful，是weaken。

A. 无关

B. 无关
C. 无关

D. 无关

答案是A还是E？求NN分析一下~~！谢谢。。。

beihorse · 发表于 2012-12-5 01:19:42

A is obviously the correct answer.

The argument claims that poor scientific work is not harmful because it will be refuted or corrected by other scientists.

A provides introduces a time frame that weakens the argurment, saying that poor scientific work can do harm before other scientists can challenge it sometimes after years. Therefore, scientific work should be confirmed before it can be published.

Let me give you an example to illustrate this logic.

A fire will probally do no or little harm if someone is there to put it out as soon as it starts. However, it may have burned down your house if the fireman comes three hours laters.

E does not weaken the argument. Instead, it may slightly strenghten the argument. Since most scientists work as part of a team rather than alone, we can assume that collaboration reduces the possibility of errors. Or, the results have been reviewed by other team members.

Note that the main conclusion of the argument is:

There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published.

狒狒逻辑一道题求解~~~！

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块