OG16新题第4题

innocence8888

4. Editorial: The roof of Northtown’s municipal equipment-storage building collapsed
under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed
recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the
nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller
size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how
even a single, apparently insignificant departure from safety standards can have
severe consequences.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?
(A) The only other buildings to suffer roof collapses from the weight of the
snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting
standards than those in the codes.
(B) The amount of snow that accumulated on the roof of the equipmentstorage
building was greater than the predicted maximum that was used in
drawing up the safety codes.
(C) Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human
occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office
building did not apply to it.
(D) The municipality of Northtown itself has the responsibility for ensuring
that buildings constructed within its boundaries meet the provisions of the
building-safety codes.
(E) Because the equipment-storage building was used for storing snowremoval
equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.




OA：B
如何解释C？他因：equipment-storage building的标准本身就比office building低，并不是nail的错。

mnimi

C选项，equipment-storage building的标准本身就比office building低, 不代表这个低标准就能够collapse
如果这个低标准在snow时候不能够collapse，那这个collapse就可能是因为nail不合标准。

alzn2765

他因：equipment-storage building的标准本身就比office building低，并不是nail的错。
C选项：Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.

这个“低”字你是从哪里读出来的？我读完C选项也没找到有任何说标准低的意思。还是你自己添加了一个根据你自己理解的assumption：货仓的安全标准一定比办公室低？美国装核武器的货仓是货仓不？你觉得哪里的安全标准和办公室的安全标准哪个高？
some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it. 只是说有些办公室适用的安全标准仓库不适用。没错啊！就上面的例子，办公室可能对防火要求有核武器仓库对防火的要求一样吗？

Mlle_fernweh

C选项：设备储藏间修来不是给人用的，许多运用到办公楼上的安全规程不会运用到储藏间的修建上。

这是一个无关选项。试问，人不用的建筑，质量就要差到倒塌吗？


这道题的结论是：任何无关紧要的安全偏差，都会造成严重后果。要削弱这个结论，就要说明，储藏室倒塌这件事，与安全偏差没有关系。

因果题中的削弱，有一种类型是：造成结果的并非A因，而是其他因素。


B选项：储藏室屋顶累积的雪比安全规范中规定的最大量大。该选项的意思是：不是楼房质量问题，是雪太大了！成功驳斥了结论。

IreneGao

我觉得错选C的思维路径是，equipment-storage building的安全标准应该低于human occupied buildings, 因此即使nails比human occupied buildings的标准小，也不能说明它比equipment-storage building的标准小，因此depature from standard这件事情有可能是不存在的；

这种思维问题在于：
1）没有信息指明两种building的safety standards孰高孰低，因此这个选项的argument到最后也没有说清楚到底是房屋坍塌和钉子小到底是什么关系（S/W的方向非常不确定）；
2）这种思路的本质是在反驳前提！
如果我们分析一下这道题的逻辑链：

P1: The nails used in the equipment-storage building were smaller than the safety code;
P2: The building using these smaller nails collapsed under the weight of heavy snowfall;
C1: Since "the nails were smaller in size/departure from the standard" and "the collapse under snowfall" coexist together, it must be the case that the insufficient size leads to the collapse.
C2: Any small, even insignificant departure from the safety standards can have severe consequences.

就能知道这个选项at best也只是在反驳前提，说nails were smaller是不存在的，因此显然是无效攻击；