个人认为一道非常值得做的argument

cathycathyhan · 发表于 2011-5-14 11:47:42

看看大家的选项是什么？
The retina scanner, a machine that scans the web of tiny blood vessels in the retina, stores information about the pattern informed by the blood vessels. This information allows it to recognize any pattern it has previously scanned. No two eyes have identical patterns of blood vessels in the retina. A retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person whether it has ever scanned a retina of that person before.

The reasoning in the argument depends upon assuming that
A. diseases of the human eye do not alter the pattern of blood vessels in the retina in ways that would make the pattern unrecognizable to the retina scanner.
B. no person has a different pattern of blood vessels in the retina of the left eye than in the retina of the right eye
C. there are enough retina scanners to store information about every person's retinas
D the number of blood vessels in the human retina is invariant, although the patterns they form differ from the person to person.
E there is no person whose retinas have been scanned by two or more different retina scanners.

ivy3997 · 发表于 2011-5-14 16:37:23

A。。。。。。。。。。

zxc1990 · 发表于 2011-5-14 18:34:16

刚起床头是昏的暂时没看出来。。。mark一记

ivy3997 · 发表于 2011-5-14 19:06:07

let me try this:

Premise: No two eyes have identical patterns of blood vessels in the retina

Premise: he retina scanner can stores information about the pattern

Conclusion: A retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person whether it has ever scanned a retina of that person before.

这个你可以把retina换成指纹来理解，有个指纹机能认出每个人的指纹类型，然后对照指纹库。然后没两个人有相同指纹。所以指纹机可以被用来比如说法庭指认或者定罪什么的。

那你想啊，这中间肯定有个漏洞就是，有人带指纹手套和其他人一样怎么办，或者有人手指受伤或者变异指纹改变了呢

A就是指出了这个问题

cathycathyhan · 发表于 2011-5-15 02:13:37

Ivy,你把这个retina换成了指纹机，我还是没理解你的说法。而且你分析的两个premise和我分析的premise不太一样。我分析的premise是
premise: pattern formed by blood vessel information to recognise any pattern
premise: no two eyes have identical pattern.
你的assumption是什么？

ivy3997 · 发表于 2011-5-15 22:24:31

你找premise必须有环节和conclusion相关才可以啊
就像一个著名的三段论：
Premise1: All men will die.
Premise2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion:Socrates will die.
对吧？
你找的两个premise都说patten，你怎么得出A retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person这样的结论呢？你都没给出scanner的信息啊。

所谓assumption无非是填gap，或者排除其他干扰因素。这个argument隐含的assumption就是，作者觉得根本不可能出现什么疾病因素使得某人retina patten改变，所以机器绝对好用，绝对能成功识别，A说的就是这么个事。

希望我这次解释清楚了。

cathycathyhan · 发表于 2011-5-19 00:25:35

Ivy,谢谢你的解释。不过我的理解和你大体不一样。我前面写的premise是用自己的语言写在本子上的。这次看了一些参考书，对这道题有深一步的理解。
Premise 1 : The retina scanner, a machine that scans the web of tiny blood vessels in the retina, stores information about the pattern informed by the blood vessels.
Premise 2: This information allows it to recognize any pattern it has previously scanned.
Premise 3: No two eyes have identical patterns of blood vessels in the retina.
Conclusion: A retina scanner can therefore be used successfully to determine for any person whether it has ever scanned a retina of that person before.
这道题premise 1是描述一个事实，premise 2看不出什么。premise 3其中有个No这个词，那它本身没有什么漏洞的。这三个premise的排序,我看Bible介绍，说argument里的句子顺序有可能也会被打乱的，比如结论在中间什么的。
那premise 1和premise 3没有什么问题，出题人的思路肯定放在premise 2了，这个想法应该是没有看答案之前就建立的。
答案A是premise 2的改写，那就是正确的答案。我的思路和你有点不一样。这样可以解释可以排除另外四个答案了。而且光看答案A觉得非常奇怪，其实我们不是很熟悉改写过的答案。这个也是出题人的思路。
你说的那个例子对于GMAT更加适合，我觉得LSAT对阅读的理解能力更高。

阿朗 · 发表于 2011-6-12 17:54:17

直接用排除法，就可以得出正确答案的

个人认为一道非常值得做的argument

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()