费费逻辑58

clumsy123

Some people saythat the scarcity of food is a function of the finite limits of the earth’sresources, coupled with a relentless rate of population growth. This analysisfails to recognize, however, that much of the world’s agricultural resourcesare used to feed livestock instead of people. In the United States, for example, almostone-half of the agricultural acreage is devoted to crops fed to livestock. Asteer reduces twenty-one pounds of inexpensive grain to one pound of expensivemeat. Thus, the scarcity of food is not merely a function of limited resourcesand population growth.
Which one of thefollowing is an assumption that would allow the conclusion in the argument tobe properly drawn?
(A) People prefer eating meat to eating grain.
(B) Meat istwenty-one times more expensive than grain.
(C) The limits ofthe earth’s agricultural resources are not finite.
(D) More thanone-half of the agricultural acreage in the United States is devoted to cropsfed to humans.
(E) Growing crops forhuman consumption on the acreage currently devoted to crops for livestock willyield more food for more people.

我有个地方不太明白，E选项说会yield more food for more people，那不就否定了题干的事实：the scarcity of food  了么？？？

sorcerer

其实我也是啊~~~你刚开始准备吧~~~刚开始准备都是摸着石头过河的，做题做多了就有感觉了
反正我是走了不少弯路
如果什么教训值得你借鉴的
我觉得有
1、从纷繁复杂的段落信息中抽象出逻辑结构，什么事前提什么是结论，哪里出现转折，谁支持谁反对
2、关注结论或者目的，这个是区分答案与问题相关与否的关键，建议LZ多分析分析OG，几乎每道题正确答案都会跟结论或目的联系，当然must be true这种没结论的另当别论

clumsy123

啊~~我果然是没看懂题
原来是 将用来生产的地换做给人提供食物。。。

好郁闷啊，我经常因为这种没看懂句子导致做错题T T
有什么办法可以解决么？

sorcerer

lz没看懂题啊~~~再仔细看看~~~
题目说scarcity of food是因为一些地用来生产东西去 feed livestock
这个argument的观点是食物匮乏不是因为资源问题，而是地用去生产东西喂动物了导致一些人没得吃
所以这个assumption就是E啊

E取非
如果用来生产的地换做给人提供食物不能养活更多人，那么这些地是否用去种植动物吃的饲料就不会对scarcity产生影响
就不会得出这个结论了