ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 777|回复: 1
打印 上一主题 下一主题

问费费逻辑58题~给出的解释是不是有问题啊。。。感觉完全理解反了。

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2013-6-2 18:13:18 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
58. Some people say that the scarcity of food is afunction of the finite limits of the earth’s resources, coupled with arelentless rate of population growth. This analysis fails to recognize,however, that much of the world’s agricultural resources are used to feedlivestock instead of people. In the United States, for example, almost one-halfof the agricultural acreage is devoted to crops fed to livestock. A steerreduces twenty-one pounds of inexpensive grain to one pound of expensive meat.Thus, the scarcity of food is not merely a function of limited resources andpopulation growth.

Which one of the following is an assumption thatwould allow the conclusion in the argument to be properly drawn?

A.     Peopleprefer eating meat to eating grain.
B.     Meatis twenty-one times more expensive than grain.
C.     Thelimits of the earth’s agricultural resources are not finite.
D.     Morethan one-half of the agricultural acreage in the United States is devoted todrops fed to humans.
E.     Growingcrops for human consumption on the acreage currently devoted to crops forlivestock will yield more food for more people.
E is the best answer. 喂养牲畜消耗的粮食为人们创造更多的食物。(题目内容是:有观点认为食物缺乏是因为土地资源有限而人口数量却不断增多。但作者认为该观点忽视了农产品中有相当大一部分是用来喂家畜的。在美国几乎有一半土地的粮食是为了养家畜。1磅肉要用去21磅廉价的谷物。因此,食物缺乏不仅是因为土地资源有限而人口数量却不断增多。)根据题目要求,我们只须反驳养家畜对粮食紧缺造成的影响。选项A中即使人们爱吃肉只会引起更多的粮食消耗,不能反驳作者;B并不能充分改变人们的取向;C强词夺理;D重复事实。

上面红字,我觉得理解反了吧?原文问的是支持argument的assumption,而原文的conclusion是:粮食短缺不仅仅是资源有限和人口增长——换言之,就是粮食短缺还有其他原因,即是家畜饲养。要建立assumption的话,就是要找支持家畜对粮食紧缺造成影响的证据,怎么会是要去反驳呢?是不是我题目理解有问题啊?


收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2013-6-3 09:08:27 | 只看该作者
求解答呀!!!
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, 2025-2-17 14:59
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