og13th 100题 选项看不懂求解释

vividlai

Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime.

The debater's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of these grounds?

(A) It takes for granted that the manufacturing division is a typical division of the corporation with regard to the average amount of overtime its employees work each month.

(B) It takes for granted that if a certain average of amount of overtime is worked each month by each employee of the Haglut Corporation, then approximately the same amount of overtime must be worked each month by each employee of the manufacturing division.

(C) It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.

(D) It overlooks the possibility that even if, on average, a certain amount of overtime is worked by the members of some group, many members of that group may work no overtime at all.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that even if most employees of the corporation work some overtime each month, anyone corporate employee may, in some months, work no overtime.

求解选项 BC的意思。。。感觉说的好绕啊

虾米zz

花一个下午搞清楚了，甚至学了一下，充分条件，和必要条件，希望对之后的同学有帮助。
首先是句子主干：It confuses a claim with a claim
这两个claim 分别是：
1. the argument’s conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow from the claim
论证中(关于H公司的)结论 是有必要的根据'the claim'
这里的逻辑是： claim -> 结论

2. a claim that would follow from the argument’s conclusion only with a high degree of probability.
一个结论，只是很有可能通过论证的结论推出来。
逻辑链：结论-> (很有可能推出)claim

再举例说明：
1. 下雨了 地一定是湿的；
2. 地湿了 很有可能下雨，或者很有可能刚有人擦地了。

也就是 A可以推出B，但B只是有可能推出C这里把A和C搞混了，也就是搞混了，条件和结论 或者是搞混了因果关系。

shiiiver

感谢分享！               

slisli_

Mark一下！               

780一次过

正常情况分析：
Debater： H公司制造部门的员工平均每个月加班的量是14个小时。大多数H公司的员工在制造部门工作。此外，公司工作的任何一个员工每个月加班的量通常在月与月之间通常没有波动。因此，在每一个月当中，H公司大多数的员工差不多都必定加班工作至少一些时间【这句话是argument】。
题目是weaken类型：
A. 它想当然地认为制造部门是一个典型的公司部门，这个部门考虑了员工每月加班时间。
说制造业是怎样一个部门，无关
B. 它想当然地认为如果H公司员工在每月加班某一个平均的量，那么近似相同的加班量一定会被制造部门员工每月所加班。
H的加班总量是怎样的，那制造部门应该是怎样的，无关
C. 它混淆了关于这个公司所必要得出的结论和关于这个公司只有很高可能性得出的结论
怎样得出的结论，和得出怎样的结论是想怎样，无关
D. 它忽略了那种可能性，即使某个小组成员加班了一定量的时间，那个小组的很多成员也可能一点都没有加班。刚好反了most people，说总体work overtime的原因是小部分人加班了，而非most people都加班，他因削弱，完美
E. 它忽略了那种可能性，即使大多数公司的员工都会在每个月加班，任何一个公司员工可能在一些月份当中没有加班。 想用反例削弱，但是①前提已经承认了most people都work overtime②any one may本身就不够程度去削弱

780一次过

看不懂硬凹出来的…野路子分析法见下↓↓↓
Way:
1. debater's argument：most H的员工都至少有work overtime的现象
2. 找point：overtime， most employee
3. 看选项，找选项核心
A选项：核心：manufacturing division是什么样一个部门，无关
B选项：如果H的员工overtime，其他manufacturing division该怎样做，无关
C选项：这个argument需要一个很大可能性的conclusion，根本没提到argument的内容，要怎么weaken？
E选项：“most employees of the corporation work some overtime each month”这句话承认了argument的内容，就已经没办法weaken了，还有后边的any one may 就削弱性来看也只是个例，很难rufute

潘小潘潘

感谢分享！               

一个小懵逼

谢谢

陈生生

感谢分享！               

zjmsg

感谢分享！