请问如何理解lawyer NN 讲的结论的特殊性和具体性（已经补充题目，再请版主指导）

welkin

正在努力研习lawyer前辈写的文章，但本人愚笨，实在无法参透文中说的要注意结论的特殊性和具体性 ，哪位高手能指导一二吗？万分感谢啊...
还有怎么样算原文有充分必要推理呢？ 文中所说的画圈法指的又是什么呢？

lawyer前辈的文章在此http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardID=24&ID=74525&page=1

不知道OG110 选项D是否属于这种类型

110. Robot satellites relay important communications and identify weather patterns. Because the satellites can be repaired only in orbit, astronauts are needed to repair them. Without repairs, the satellites would eventually malfunction. Therefore, space flights carrying astronauts must continue.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) Satellites falling from orbit because of malfunctions burn up in the atmosphere.

(B) Although satellites are indispensable in the identification of weather patterns, weather forecasters also make some use of computer projections to identify weather patters.

(C) The government, responding to public pressure, has decided to cut the budget for space flights and put more money into social welfare programs.

(D) Repair of satellites requires heavy equipment, which adds to the amount of fuel needed to lift a spaceship carrying astronauts into orbit.

(E) Technical obsolescence of robot satellites makes repairing them more costly and less practical than sending new, improved satellites into orbit.

110.

The argument presented in support of manned spaceflights rests on the notion that astronauts are needed to repair satellites. If sending up a new, improved satellite is less costly and more practical than repairing an old one, however, as choice E states, the argument is weakened. Choice E is therefore the best answer.

None of the other choices gives any reason to think that manned spaceflights are not a necessity, so none of them is correct. Choice A describes one consequence of not repairing satellites, while choice B refers to another tool that weather forecasters use in addition to satellites. Choice C describes the circumstances in which defending manned spaceflight has become an issue, and choice D states a practical, but not insuperable, difficulty faced by flights intended for repair projects.

答案D是不是因为没有针对原文中的前提的具体性来说的呢？ 我对D为什么错不是很理解，请版主解惑，感谢了

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-22 10:42:33编辑过]

welkin

没有人回答，只能自己顶一下了

welkin

难道没有一个人知道要如何理解吗？ 再顶....

bigmouse

这个问题确实不好回答，因为这是lawyer根据自己的经验总结出来的。

最好GG能拿出具体题目来，大家好讨论～～～

welkin

已经补充题目

ring_cheng

我的一点个人理解，供参考：

先明确原文的逻辑链是什么：

（前提：）卫星很重要--卫星要经常维护，不维护就会坏掉--只有在轨道中卫星才可以被维修--（结论：）一定要派载人飞船去维修

削弱就要说：“不一定要派载人飞船去”并给出具体的原因

让我们来分析一下各选项：

(A) Satellites falling from orbit because of malfunctions burn up in the atmosphere.--说明卫星坏掉之后的严重性，但并不能就此justify“不派载人飞船”，A选项在原文的逻辑链之外

(B) Although satellites are indispensable in the identification of weather patterns, weather forecasters also make some use of computer projections to identify weather patters.--原文说的是要不要派载人飞船去，跟天气预报员使用其它方式工作有何关系，无关选项

(C) The government, responding to public pressure, has decided to cut the budget for space flights and put more money into social welfare programs.--这个选项只能说明载人飞船项目没钱进行，从而成为一个是否维护该项目的问题，但不能说明为什么“不需要载人飞船”，无关

(D) Repair of satellites requires heavy equipment, which adds to the amount of fuel needed to lift a spaceship carrying astronauts into orbit.--该选项指出“载人飞船”项目面临的困难（注意：这符合结论中的KW-载人飞船，符合特殊性要求），但该选项却没有说明这个困难能否被克服（如果不能被克服的话，那么进行载人飞船项目可能是个错误的决定，从而削弱结论；如果能够被克服的话，则说明载人飞船项目少了一个困难，但不能就此说明进行载人飞船的必需性）

(E) Technical obsolescence of robot satellites makes repairing them more costly and less practical than sending new, improved satellites into orbit.--说明卫星根本不需要维修，从而也不需要派载人飞船去了。正确

欢迎讨论！

lawyer_1

结论是是否需要送宇航员上天的问题，该结论的特殊性和具体性表现在：是送宇航员，不是别的人。是需不需要的问题，不是有没有，贵不贵的问题。这样ABCD就在该特殊性之外。只有E在讨论需不需要的问题。

welkin

严重感谢大家的指导，我对特殊性和具体性的含义已经能大致理解了。

但下面的问题就是如何使用这个特点来做判断无关选项。是不是所有的题目都能用结论的特殊性和具体性进行无关选项排除呢？ 还是只限于削弱题呢？

欢迎大家讨论

huihui_717

我也想问，能不能请lawyer_1 再举些例子或者阐述的更详细些呢？刚入门，苯，不好意思

xiexie

fieri

谢谢lawyer的解答，受益匪浅啊