有人做天山3么,怎么逻辑这么奇怪啊!谢谢哈

jessiebetty · 发表于 2006-7-27 11:33:00

T-3-Q3.

Scientists have made genetic modifications to cotton to increase its resistance to insect pests. According to farmers’ report, the amount of insecticide needed per acre to control insect pests was only slightly lower for those who tried the modified seed than for those who did not. Therefore, since the modified seed costs more than ordinary seed without producing yields of higher market value, switching to the modified seed would be unlikely to benefit most cotton farmers economically.

Which of the following would it be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument?

Whether farmers who tried the modified cotton seed had ever tried growing other crops from genetically modified seed.
Whether the insecticides typically used on ordinary cotton tend to be more expensive than insecticides typically used on other crops.
Whether for most farms who grow cotton it is their primary crop
Whether the farmers who have tried the modified speed planted as many acres of cotton, on average, as farmers using the ordinary seed did.
Whether most of the farmers who tried the modified seed did so because they had previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.

为什么是B, E不行?

T-3-Q13.

The traditional treatment of strep infections has been a seven-day course of antibiotics, either penicillin or erythromycin. However, since many patients stop taking those drugs within three days, reinfection is common in cases where these drugs are prescribed. A new antibiotic requires only a three-day course of treatment. Therefore, reinfection will probably be less common in cases where the new antibiotic is prescribed than in cases where either penicillin or erythromycin is prescribed.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

Some of people who are allergic to penicillin are likely to be allergic to the new antibiotic.
A course of treatment with the new antibiotic costs about the same as a course of treatment with either penicillin or erythromycin.
The new antibiotic has been shown to be effective in eradicating bacterial infections other than strep.
Some physicians have already begun to prescribe the new antibiotic instead of penicillin or erythromycin for the treatment of some strep infections
Regardless of whether they take a traditional antibiotic or the new one, most patients feel fully recovered after taking the drug for three days.

感觉E是无关啊,为什么是他, D不行么

kdjd · 发表于 2006-7-27 12:13:00

T-3-Q3.
B比较的是 ordinary cotton 和 other crops 。而文中比较的是modified了的和没modified的。无关选项
E中说农民伯伯是否是因为在之前要用大量的农药才选择modified seed的。和前提无关无关
答案是D吗？

后面一道题不太明白为什么选E。是不是因为要比较用药后reinfection的程度，那么就得有一个不变的量？
但D肯定错，是否有人开始用新的antibiotic不能证明什么。

gonghao · 发表于 2006-7-27 12:59:00

T-3-Q3.

为什么是B, E不行?
---------------------------------------
文章说的是，改良的种子可以抵抗虫子，但是消耗的杀虫剂的量比起一般的种子消耗的量只少一点点，其成本又高，同时改良的种子长出来的东西也没什么很高的市场价值，因此这样的尝试改良的种子对农民来说没什么经济利益。

问：评价
评价结论，即评价因为成本高，产出来的东西价值低，尝试改良种子对农民来说不经济。要求选项可以加强或者削弱结论。

E：是否【尝试使用改良的种子的农民之所以这样做（这样做是指尝试新的改良的种子）是因为他们之前使用了大量的杀虫剂。】

E若是【是】：农民之所以这样尝试新的改良的种子是因为他们之前使用了大量的杀虫剂，换句话说，大量使用了杀虫剂迫使农民转像了改良的种子。但是这一点和文章相背。文章告诉我们，杀虫剂用量只是轻微下降。这暂且不论了。看看【农民因为大量使用杀虫剂所以转向新种子】本身能削弱还是加强结论【改良种子对农民来说不经济】？个人感觉无法加强或者削弱。

同理E若是【不是】：【农民并非因为大量使用杀虫剂所以转向新种子】那就是说【还有其它原因使得农民转向新种子】本身是否能加强或削弱结论【改良种子对农民来说不经济】？其它原因是好还是坏呢，要是好就削弱，要是坏就加强，就像一个套一个的evaluation。【还有其它原因使得农民转向新种子】本身是中性的。不能加强或这削弱。

我个人倾向于答案B
－－－－－－－－－－－
这题曾经引发众多高手的讨论
B/E 是争议较大的选项，可以参考这个帖子
http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=24&replyid=1074314&id=83238&page=1&skin=0&Star=1

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-7-27 13:02:21编辑过]

gonghao · 发表于 2006-7-27 13:22:00

T-3-Q13.

The traditional treatment of strep infections has been a seven-day course of antibiotics, either penicillin or erythromycin. However, since many patients stop taking those drugs within three days, reinfection is common in cases where these drugs are prescribed. A new antibiotic requires only a three-day course of treatment. Therefore, reinfection will probably be less common in cases where the new antibiotic is prescribed than in cases where either penicillin or erythromycin is prescribed.
传统的使用penicillin or erythromycin治疗infetion的，要吃7天药。然而，许多患者3天就停药了，因此重复感染。现在出来一个新的药，只要吃3天。因此新的药产生的重复感染少。
作者的逻辑很清楚
老药－－计划7天治好－－患者3天就不吃了－－还没治好－－重复感染
新药－－计划3天治好－－患者3天就不吃了－－已经治好－－没有重复感染
E的意思，就是不管老药还是新药，患者不吃的药的原因就是他们感觉自己好了。因此加强了结论。即使得【患者3天就不吃了】合情合理。
传统的使用penicillin or erythromycin治疗infetion的，要吃7天药。然而，许多患者3天就停药了，因此重复感染。现在出来一个新的药，只要吃3天。因此新的药产生的重复感染少。
作者的逻辑很清楚
老药－－计划7天治好－－患者3天就不吃了－－还没治好－－重复感染
新药－－计划3天治好－－患者3天就不吃了－－已经治好－－没有重复感染
E的意思，就是不管老药还是新药，患者不吃的药的原因就是他们感觉自己好了。因此加强了结论。即使得【患者3天就不吃了】合情合理。

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-7-27 13:24:01编辑过]

kallyli · 发表于 2006-7-27 14:36:00

第一题我也认为选B,因为强调的是benefit,跟钱有关

结论是说：当开始开新药后比开旧药时再感染的几率小。
E。无论哪种药，吃三天人们就觉得好了，然后停用。用新药确实完全好了，不复发，旧药疗程是七天，所以停用就复发。加强结论。 D无法加强。无关

kdjd · 发表于 2006-7-28 10:48:00

不太明白，为什么D不对呢？B的比较无关啊。

有人做天山3么,怎么逻辑这么奇怪啊!谢谢哈