【关于驳斥必要性】determine

Yui1991

看到00分大牛tonyadidas的AA 模版

必要性理解无能

必要性攻击At firstplace, the author unfairly assumes that A determined solely by B. While B is aseemingly important element in determining A, it is hardly the only or evennecessarily required element. This assumption overlooks other crucial criteriain determining A—such as C, D, to list just a few. Accordingly, withoutaccounting for these potential factors, the author concludes too hastily thatthese prescriptions cited are the best means of achieving goals.

主要是不理解A determined solely by B 和 other crucial criteria in determining A

1.我的理解是：只有B——>A，然后C和D是驳斥它，说还有C,D也可能——>A（ crucial criteria in determining A）。
　　　　　【但是感觉这就说不通了，因为这是找他因，感觉是充分性的攻击啊？】
                    所以我想问是不是我对那个determine的理解是错误的。

2.感觉原来模版想要表达的意思是：A只能——>B，然后CD驳斥它，说A还可以推出其他结果即C或D，那“ other crucial criteria in determining A”我就完全理解反了。



所以求大牛们解释到底是哪个？因为如果没有搞明白的话到时候两种看法的Ｃ，Ｄ写出来就是完全不同的东西，怕到时候写错啊＝　＝

２２号就考试！！！在线等挺急的



附上充分性模版：

充分性攻击At secondplace, the author’s solution rests on the assumption that B is sufficient togive birth to the desired goals. However, if it turns out that A is due to acombination of factors, some of which will remain unchanged in the future, suchas C and D, mere B might have no stimulating impact on A.

这个不就是B——>A，驳斥它就是用C,D也能推出A，所以驳充分性呗...
那不是和我理解的那个必要性一样了啊？
所以怀疑是不是理解错了，是不是应该是第二个意思？？

求大牛确认！！！！

Yui1991

好像我自己说一说又说明白了= =

Yui1991

不对！还是没明白！！两个放一起更搞不清了= =