ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1498|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

OG11-18, 谁能帮着解释

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2008-8-11 12:03:00 | 只看该作者

OG11-18, 谁能帮着解释

18. Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm others as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each perosn's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

Answer B: Antomobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

OG的解释有点模糊,谁能再解释一下?

沙发
发表于 2008-8-12 12:38:00 | 只看该作者
这道题之前已经讨论不少了 可以搜索一下
题干是说有反对者反对强行要求系安全带的法案, 因为在FREE SOCIETY里, 人们应该自己TAKE RISK, 但是前提是不伤害他人

问题是要WEAKEN结论

B选项说汽车保险费增高, 因为要支付逐渐增长的第三者伤害(而这个第三者伤害正是因为人们不带安全带引起的), 这就BREAK了题干的结论, 因为正式因为伤害了他人, 所以保险费才会高

WEAKEN可以有新概念出现
板凳
发表于 2008-9-6 00:16:00 | 只看该作者

那B选项和E选项好像也没有什么区别嘛

(E) In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.

这里E选项里也主要强调的是passengers啊,而B选项上increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.我觉得也是指的是没带安全带的人啊

还是有些不解

地板
发表于 2008-9-6 10:04:00 | 只看该作者
E选项里说不带安全带伤的多,但原文结论说的是在不影响别人的情况下,应该自己take risk、玩命都可以
所以伤的多是自己take risk自找的,并没有weaken结论
b选项对车主有影响了
这题的关键在于是否对别人有影响(自己愿意死没人拦着)
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, 2025-2-21 20:58
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部