关于狒狒逻辑宝典里的一个题目

21. Historian: We can learn about the medical history of individuals through chemical analysis of their hair. It is likely, for example, that Isaac Newton’s psychological problems were due to mercury poisoning; traces of mercury were found in his hair. Analysis is now being done on a lock of Beethoven’s hair. Although no convincing argument has shown that Beethoven ever had a venereal disease, some people hypothesize that venereal disease caused his deafness. Since mercury was commonly ingested in Beethoven’s time to treat venereal disease, if researchers find a trace of mercury in his hair, we can conclude that this hypothesis is correct.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the historian’s argument depends?

(A) None of the mercury introduced into the body can be eliminated.

(B) Some people in Beethoven’s time did not ingest mercury.

(C) Mercury is an effective treatment for venereal disease.

(D) Mercury poisoning can cause deafness in people with venereal disease.

(E) Beethoven suffered from psychological problems of the same severity as Newton’s.

The answer given is B. My choice is C.

Any NN can make any comments on the answer? Thanks!

不是nn，来抛砖引玉，说说我的理解~^^

首先是有人认为B是死于venereal disease（V）

然后就提到mercury 在B的时期常被用于治疗V

因此作者就认为只要能够在B的头发中找到a trace of mercury就能说明B是死于V

个人认为做这道题的时候要取非，对B取非也就是说B的时期所有的人都会注射M这种物质，这显然是原文的削弱选项~~因此选B，至于直接去选择我也很难理解为什么会选B

我当时错选了A，后来看到解释是说A项在Newton的例子中已经体现了~~

至于C项，个人认为原文中“mercury was commonly ingested in Beethoven’s time to treat venereal disease”给出的信息足以排除了~