ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1777|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

OG13TH 100 求助

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-12-26 23:09:01 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
100. Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime.







The debater’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of these grounds?







(A) It takes for granted that the manufacturing division is a typical division of the corporation with regard to the average amount of overtime its employees work each month.







(B) It takes for granted that if a certain average amount of overtime is worked each month by each employee of the Haglut Corporation, then approximately the same amount of overtime must be worked each month by each employee of the manufacturing division.







(C) It confuses a claim from which the argument’s conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument’s conclusion only with a high degree of probability.







(D) It overlooks the possibility that even if, on average, a certain amount of overtime is worked by the members of some group, many members of that group may work no overtime at all.







(E) It overlooks the possibility that even if most employees of the corporation work some overtime each month, any one corporate employee may, in some months, work no overtime.



这个题如何解?! C选项表示看不懂·········!!!!

收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2012-12-27 15:30:13 | 只看该作者
个人认为是D,The average amount of overtime 不等于每一个人都 overtime
也可能是一小部分人的 overtime 平摊到了每个人头上。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2012-12-27 23:51:42 | 只看该作者
能解释下 C 是什么东西么?
地板
发表于 2012-12-28 02:58:52 | 只看该作者
(C) It confuses a claim from which the argument’s conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument’s conclusion only with a high degree of probability.


混淆了 充分条件,即必然性(a claim from which the argument’s conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow)和 极大的可能性
5#
发表于 2012-12-30 01:18:41 | 只看该作者
necessarily副词=介词短语with a  necessity伴随着一个必然性,with a high degree of probability伴随着极大的可能性

It confuses a claim 。。。with a claim 。。。
把一个观点的必然性,当成了混淆成了可能性
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:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-4 21:38
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