求助：大全-8-11

11.   A group of children of various ages was read stories in which people caused harm, some of those people doing so intentionally, and some accidentally. When asked about appropriate punishments for those who had caused harm, the younger children, unlike the older ones, assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally or accidentally. Younger children, then, do not regard people’s intentions as relevant to punishment.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?

(A) In interpreting these stories, the listeners had to draw on a relatively mature sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally.

(B) In these stories, the severity of the harm produced was clearly stated.

(C) Younger children are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are older children.
                    

(D) The older children assigned punishment in a way that closely resembled the way adults had assigned punishment in a similar experiment.

      (E) The younger children assigned punishments that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.

这道题为什么选A啊，E为什么不对呢？谢谢牛人指教。

前提（事实）1：  给一组不同年龄的儿童讲故事，告诉他们故事中的人物cause harm的动机，是故意的或者是无意的。

前提（事实）2：  低龄儿童在assigned punishments的时候，不根据人物故意或是无意

结论：                      低龄儿童不认为人的动机和处罚程度有关系。

如果低龄儿童在听故事的时候，虽然被告知哪个是故意哪个是无意，但是以他们当时的认知能力，根本分辨不出什么是故意什么是无意，那么前提2和结论所构成的因果关系就被推翻了。正是A的内容。

对于E，低龄儿童在判断处罚程度的时候是根据伤害的程度，这并不能说他们在判断处罚程度的时候不根据人的动机，而只是提出了一种其他的可能性。所以没有起到Weaken作用。

嗯，我明白一些了，谢谢julianfl。

请问E算不算是他因削弱呢？

我感觉不能，他因削弱 需要三个条件，（1）题目原因和原文结论构成明显因果关系。（2）题目原因和原文原因具有可替代性。（3）两个原因本身并无关系。

比如OG10第29题

The number of people diagnosed as having a certain intestinal disease has dropped significantly in a rural county this year, as compared to last year. Health officials attribute this decrease entirely to improved sanitary conditions at water-treatment plants, which made for cleaner water this year and thus reduced the incidence of the disease.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the health officials’ explanation for the lower incidence of the disease?
A. Many new water-treatment plants have been built in the last five years in the rural county.
B. Bottled spring water has not been consumed in significantly different quantities by people diagnosed as having the intestinal disease, as compared to people who did not contract the disease.
C. Because of a new diagnostic technique, many people who until this year would have been diagnosed as having the intestinal disease are now correctly diagnosed as suffering from intestinal ulcers.
D. Because of medical advances this year, far fewer people who contract the intestinal disease will develop severe cases of the disease.
E. The water in the rural county was brought up to the sanitary standards of the water in neighboring counties ten years ago.

很典型， improved sanitary conditions at water-treatment plants和a new diagnostic technique having the intestinal disease are now correctly diagnosed as suffering from intestinal ulcers，这两个都和The number of people diagnosed as having a certain intestinal disease has dropped significantly这个结论构成明显因果关系，并且两者具有互换性，且两者没有任何直接关系。

但是这道题目，感觉E选项和结论并没有构成直接的因果关系。低龄儿童在判断处罚程度的时候是根据伤害的程度，他并没有说低龄儿童在判断处罚程度的时候仅仅是根据伤害的程度，所以也就不能够否认低龄儿童认为人的动机和处罚程度有关系。：）

还有一点做题的感觉，他因的时候一般结论都应该是肯定句，不能是否定句：）

最后，呵呵，考试的时候估计没时间想这么多，还是多做点题目体会一下各种题型的感觉。

这题我也选了E，虽然我认为E也不够充分削弱原题的结论，原因正如你所说，根据伤害的程度来判断处罚程度不代表一定不根据人是否有动机来判断。

但我觉得A也不合适，A答案说，听者必须利用相关的对人类心理成熟的判断来辨别伤害是故意还是无意，但并不能说明young children就没这个辨别能力。（换言之，有这种可能，young children可能还是把伤害程度作为判断惩罚的第一标准，而把有意无意作为第二标准，这样的话，和你对E答案的解释就接近了，都是不够充分，因为不能排除一定不按伤害程度来判断。）

有点绕，似乎我也有点钻牛角尖了，还请指教。

The argument: In a survey, younger children, unlike the older ones, assigned punishments that did not vary according to the intention -> Younger children, then, do not regard people's intentions as relevant to punishment.

Weaken: Whether weaken the conslusion: Younger children regard people's intentions as relevant to punishment.

                Whether weaken the evidence, in which case the evidence could be weakened: Younger children could assign punishmentsaccording to the intention.

Other 2 types of questions which weaken the evidence:

A. customer's perception of the price is actually the price showed

B. purchasers could perceive the real and the false ivorys on the market