|
Patient: Doctor, I read an article that claimed that the first few hours after birth are very important to establishing a mother-infant bond, which is the first step in building a healthy relationship. Can you assure me that my relationship with my baby has not been permanently harmed by our separation for several days after his birth? Physician: Your relationship with your child has not been harmed by the separation. Mother-infant bonding is not like an “instant glue” that cements your relationship forever. Having your infant with you during the period immediately after birth does give your relationship a head start, but many factors are involved in building a strong and lasting relationship between a mother and her child. 6. The doctor does which one of the following in her reply to her patient? (A) She rejects an analogy in an attempt to reduce the patient’s concern. (B) She cites evidence to show that the patient’s worry is unfounded. (C) She misinterprets the patient’s explanation of her concern. (D) She establishes that the article that the patient read was in error. (E) She names other factors that are more important in creating a mother-infant bond. 答案：A。我错选成了C。A选项看上去是对的，医生确实说这个初始关系不是万能胶可以一劳永逸说还有其他因素影响未来长久关系。但是我觉得医生虽然试图解释但是是无效的。因为呢病人关心的是初始阶段的mother-infant bonding的无效是否会导致永久性不良影响。医生说由良好的Mother-infant bonding无法推导出strong and lasting relationship。即良好的开端无法必然决定永久的美好。但是这无法说明不良好的开端是不是会导致永久的不美好啊。由原命题无法推出否命题的啊应该只可以推出逆否命题才对。所以我认为医生的回答无效，然后选择了C即医生误会了病人真正关心的问题。我这样理解是哪里出了问题呢？请大牛指教！我觉得自己思路总是跑偏，怎么会这样呢？郁闷。。。
[此贴子已经被作者于2009/10/30 3:41:25编辑过] | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2009-7-15 11:37:00
