ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

正确答案: E

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2272|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助一道逻辑题

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-10-1 15:03:03 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since_________.

A. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life
B. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
D. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is
E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

这里说irradiation is worse than cooking is misleading,为什么说cooking和irradiation combine的effect 是compounded 呢?
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2012-10-2 16:59:33 | 只看该作者
E说的是双重破坏 irradiation先破坏一次 cook再破坏一次

所以是misleading

就好比说 你的考试总评  分数占70% 出勤占30% 分数比出勤权重大 所以 你没必要出勤了 这就是misleading
板凳
发表于 2012-10-2 23:05:11 | 只看该作者
______前人的解释
刚看了一个老帖的解释,自己已经想明白为什么这道题要选E了。记录一下自己的思路,抛砖引玉。

原题简化:irradiation会破坏食物的营养成分,但支持irradiation的人认为cooking也会破坏,所以两者差不多。此题的目的是要反驳这些支持者的观点,即irradiation没什么不好。

如何反驳?1)有些食物本来就是生吃,所以在同样不用cook的情况下,那么没有经过irradiation(就没有营养流失),直接生吃食物必然更好。所以irradiation不好。

2)有些食物就得cook,那么在同样需要cook的情况下,irrationan会破坏,cook也会破坏,那么没有经过irradiation,直接被cook营养流必然更少。(前提:二者加起来的破坏程度不能小于等于其中任何一种,由此就可以排除D选项)这个再一次说明irradiation不好。所以E选项说:如果这两个过程中营养破坏的程度是累积的,即,两者加起来的破坏程度大于其中任何一种(和D刚好相反)。那么经过了irradiation的食物再被cook当然更加不好了。
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, 2024-11-26 12:18
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部