OG CR Q 195 是不是错了?

OG  CR Q 195 是不是错了?

195.

A proposed change to federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and educational institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have.

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposed change in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes.

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.

195.

The passage argues that charitable and educational institutions, part of whose income comes from donations, would be negatively affected if wealthy individuals could not count such donations as deductions from their income. The question asks you to identify an assumption of the argument-that is, something that has to be true in order for the evidence presented to establish the conclusion.

Choice A is the best answer, since if this statement is false, all wealthy individuals would, even without the incentive provided by federal tax laws, donate as much money as they do now. In that case, the evidence used in the argument provides no support for the conclusion.

我看答案应该是B吧.

记得pp3 也是B

是A，B的答案太绝对了。题目中的many,some都暗示了这不是唯一的来源。

这道假设题，可以这样来做。

把选项加个not，看它对结论是不是起削弱的作用。
B：人们因那个免税法律而捐赠的钱不是慈善机构基金的唯一来源。言下之意，慈善机构还有其他的资金来源，比如说，国家赞助补贴，每个月才给2毛钱。:-( 管用吗？那么慈善机构还是有可能会降低服务、甚至关门。因为国家赞助补贴的钱太少了，连买个冰淇淋都不够。－－》这并没有对原文结论造成削弱。
A：不管有没有那个法律免税的好处，至少有一些有钱人都会（象雷锋同志一样、品格高尚、自动自觉）捐赠同样数额的钱给慈善机构。所以慈善机构不会倒闭。－－》这对原文结论造成削弱。

所以，选A没错。

OG的意思是，假如把B改一改，改成：...the most important source of funding...。这下B就对了。

把选项加个not，看它对结论是不是起削弱的作用。

这个方法真好.我开始也是选了B, 一看ORANGE的做法,就明白为什么选A了.谢谢.

呵呵。。。这类假设题的解法很通用，就是：not + 削弱

以下是引用orange2005在2006-3-7 22:21:00的发言：

这道假设题，可以这样来做。

把选项加个not，看它对结论是不是起削弱的作用。
B：人们因那个免税法律而捐赠的钱不是慈善机构基金的唯一来源。言下之意，慈善机构还有其他的资金来源，比如说，国家赞助补贴，每个月才给2毛钱。:-( 管用吗？那么慈善机构还是有可能会降低服务、甚至关门。因为国家赞助补贴的钱太少了，连买个冰淇淋都不够。－－》这并没有对原文结论造成削弱。
A：不管有没有那个法律免税的好处，至少有一些有钱人都会（象雷锋同志一样、品格高尚、自动自觉）捐赠同样数额的钱给慈善机构。所以慈善机构不会倒闭。－－》这对原文结论造成削弱。

所以，选A没错。

OG的意思是，假如把B改一改，改成：...the most important source of funding...。这下B就对了。

为什么这种加 not 的做法一定要用到极端的例子麻? 比如国家布贴两毛定什么的.
有没有 加not 用法的教程什么的,

谁能upload 一下?

谢谢哥们

呵呵。。。用极端法比较容易懂嘛，这是借鉴高中初等数学的解题思想来的。

“not + 削弱”，这是专门针对假设题的一种通用解法。目前我也没有教程。哪位有的给贡献一下？

以下是引用orange2005在2006-3-8 11:43:00的发言：

呵呵。。。这类假设题的解法很通用，就是：not + 削弱

补充一句：XDF教导要把NOT盖起来读呵

谢谢。。。唉，我真笨，题目做多了，人都有点晕了。

对，把not摁住！！！