LSAT-2-2-11(lawyer改标题)

mxh

11. “If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,” said the biologist.
“So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation,” said the politician.
Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?
(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.
(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.
(C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.
(D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.
(E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction.

答案为什么是B而非D？ i think that if deforestation is not stopped but just slowed and the koala survives, the statement is inconsistent with the politician's

谢谢！

sunder

a=>b 和 c=>b 是consistent的，不consistent的是 a=>否b

politician:  stop deforestation =〉save the koala
能与之不consistent的只有 stop deforestation =〉 koala extinct
任何" ... => save the coala" 的论点都和politician的不矛盾。

mxh

THX

swimmingfrog

以下是引用sunder在2003-8-5 20:54:00的发言：
a=>b 和 c=>b 是consistent的，不consistent的是 a=>否b

politician:  stop deforestation =〉save the koala
能与之不consistent的只有 stop deforestation =〉 koala extinct
任何" ... => save the coala" 的论点都和politician的不矛盾。

a--->b 与 c --->b 是相容的,一致的(consistent)

那么   a--->b  与   a---->c 是不相容的吗?

xjlv128

也相容吧貌似