请教OG-77，顺便讨论一下排除的思路

MWY

77. A certain mayor has proposed a fee of five dollars per day on private vehicles entering the city, claiming that the fee will alleviate the city’s traffic congestion. The mayor reasons that, since the fee will exceed the cost of round-trip bus fare from many nearby points, many people will switch from using their cars to using the bus.
Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the mayor’s reasoning is flawed?
(A) Projected increases in the price of gasoline will increase the cost of taking a private vehicle into the city.
(B) The cost of parking fees already makes it considerably more expensive for most people to take a private vehicle into the city than to take a bus.
(C) Most of the people currently riding the bus do not own private vehicles.
(D) Many commuters opposing the mayor’s plan have indicated that they would rather
endure traffic congestion than pay a five-dollar-per day fee.
(E) During the average workday, private vehicles owned and operated by people living
within the city account for twenty percent of the city’s traffic congestion.
   我觉得BCD都是反对啊，C,D大家是怎么排除的呢?

merlion

我的理解:
c, d 是无关选项吧。c说坐bus还坐bus，d说人们反对 five-dollar-per day fee，都没反对“many
people will switch from using their cars to using the bus”的结论

albert

agree..

D does not talk about what people will do after the plan take effective..in other words, D should tell us whether people will drive cars or take buses after the policy is implemented, but not whether people prefer to the traffic congestion than the charged fee..

chenjie_1028

根据费费的理论：出现FLAW,CRITICISM,RESONING ERROR和 WEAKNESS一定是断桥型的削弱。即A（费用涨了）推B（开私家车的少了）时，A有缺陷，A 推不出B。

答案B说，费用早就涨了，而开私车的人并没有少，所以B错

swlfx

thanks to MM of F4.

swlfx

agree with albert.

xiaowan

怎么觉得这题是weaken呢？？按lawyer的分类，觉得此题不应该属于weaken呀～

9．FLAW IN THE REASONING

看原文：找出原文错误

找答案：描述原文错误的为答案。描述的因素原文没有的为错误答案

TEST：描述原文的推理错误，每个元素都必须在原文出现过。

fishlibai

以下是引用chenjie_1028在2004/10/2 4:19:00的发言：

根据费费的理论：出现FLAW,CRITICISM,RESONING ERROR和 WEAKNESS一定是断桥型的削弱。即A（费用涨了）推B（开私家车的少了）时，A有缺陷，A 推不出B。

答案B说，费用早就涨了，而开私车的人并没有少，所以B错

这个解释很好，我本来一直不明白到底逻辑关系在哪里，现在明白了。其实和lawyer的解释是殊途同归的，就是找出论证的关系，然后答案是攻击这个原因，你说涨价了开车的就少了，那我就说涨价了开车的并不会少，你看原来就有例子。