[求助]一道逻辑题求教

Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from the past 25 years is covered by the Acme retirement plan.Since the winner of the nation's most prestigious award for economists have thus clearly recognized that the Acme plan offer them a financially secure future, it is probably a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs.

The advertisement's argumentation is most vulnerable to criticisim on which one of the following grounds?

(D) It takes for granted that some winners of the Economic Merit Prize have deliberately selected the Acme retirement plan,rather than having had it chosen for them by their employers.

答案是D，我觉得这个retirement plan是不是雇主为他们选择的与本argument的有效性无关，因为“the winner of the nation's most prestigious award for economists have thus clearly recognized that the Acme plan offer them a financially secure future”就是说他们自己认识到到了此plan的有效性。即使是雇主选择的，也可能完全符合经济学家们自己的选择。毕竟支撑此argumen有效性的是此plan是否真的有效，而不是说是是谁选择了plan。

大家怎么看呢？

自顶一下~

再顶~nn们救救我啊

不是应经贴上去了吗，因为是手打的，所以错误答案就省略了，只列出正确答案D。

在问啥东西啊

果然的，这道题目牵扯出一个核心的问题：我看某本LSAT的参考书上说（就是bible啦），题干中的证据均假定为真，逻辑题只考察证据之间的推理过程，所以我就一直以来把除了结论以外的证据均假定为真，这里真的是混淆了证据和事实，就是说如果把Since那一句话当事实的话，那么就是说科学家们已经自己认识到该方案的有效性，如果把Since那句话当做证据的话（其实是Sub-conclusion），即作者由第一句事实引出自己的一个子结论，从而再进一步得出最后的结论，那么这道题就可以迎刃而解，即问题出在由事实到子结论那一级。

问题是：某句话到底是事实还是作者自己YY的，似乎有点微妙。有什么好的办法判断吗？