[求助]宝典77-->bigmouse转移

hylrd

How do the airlines expect to prevent commercial plane crashes? Studies have shown that pilot error contributes to two-thirds of all such crashes. To address this problem, the airlines have upgraded their training programs by increasing the hours of classroom instruction and emphasizing communication skills in the cockpit. But it is unrealistic to expect such measures to compensate for pilots’ lack of actual flying time. Therefore, the airlines should rethink their training approach to reducing commercial crashes.

Which one of the following is an assumption upon which the argument depends?

(A) Training programs can eliminate pilot errors.

(B) Commercial pilots routinely undergo additional training throughout their careers.

(C) The number of airline crashes will decrease if pilot training programs focus on increasing actual flying time.

(D) Lack of actual flying time is an important contributor to pilot error in commercial plane crashes.（D）

       (E) Communication skills are not important to pilot training programs.

我的想法，希望得到各位的指教：

我总认为D不正确，而且具有普遍性的错误：是不是“重要因素”，与是不是必要条件之间没有什么必然的联系。也就是说：对D取非：缺乏实飞不是一个重要的导致撞机的因素。[ 但是这不意味着加强实飞，会减少撞机 ]。因此，取非不一定削弱。而如果对C取非：加强实飞，会增加撞机，或者根本没用。则是很明显的取非削弱。那么，为什么C不对呢？

这道题我在详解版中看到的解释，我认为说服力不足。

另外，我想向各位请教的，各重要的是关于：IMPORTANT FACTOR 的削弱方向。期待着各位指点，谢谢

chelseayang

conclusion: the airlines should rethink their training approach to reducing commercial crashes

Pay close attention to the wording of the conclusion, which does not specify how the training approach should be modified.

the reasoning of the argument is like this: the training program focuses on classroom instruction and communicatio skills. but such measure does not compensate for pilot's lack of flying time. so following such approach would not reduce plane crashes.therefore, we shoud rethink the training approach.

This is a cause-and-effect-----assumption question. you should identify the causal relationship the argument assumes, which is, pilot's lack of flying time causes plane crashes.

the wording of "contributor" is a typical cause-and-effect statement identifier.D is roughly the same as "lack of time causes crashes"

C does not weaken because the conclusion does not say that we should increase the flying time in the training.

hylrd

满怀感激，谢谢