ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1984|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

(请教)LSAT-2-2-11

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-11-15 11:36:00 | 只看该作者

(请教)LSAT-2-2-11

11. “If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,” said the biologist.


“So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation,” said the politician.


Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?


(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.


(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.


(C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.


(D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.


(E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction.


答案B,B和politician的论断矛盾,但是怎么会和biologist的论断一致那?

沙发
发表于 2004-11-16 11:35:00 | 只看该作者

(请教)LSAT-2-2-11

is consistent with 是指不矛盾。不冲突。不违背。
板凳
发表于 2019-8-8 19:11:00 | 只看该作者
concong 发表于 2004-11-15 11:36
11. “If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction, ...

B- If disappear ---> Koala die

P- Koala saved ---> stop deforestation
Is consistent with B but not with P

A. Disappear ---> Koala die ( Both consistent )

B. Deforestation is stopped does serve as the other sufficient condition to lead to the extinction of koala; however, there might be the other reason to be sufficient for koala extinct. so its in consistent with the claim of biologist; let us see the claim of politician - apparently, contrapositive of p's claim, koala should be saved, but not die.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

所属分类: 法学院申请

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-23 13:16
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部