求助~~~~

Saber-leilie

The government has made great strides in implementing immunization in public school systems despite its cost. When all children are properly immunized, we will be able to ensure their health.

Which of the following identifies an assumption in the author's argument?

		Only public schools require immunization.
		Children are not already properly immunized.
		If not immunized, most children will fall victim to disease.
		Immunization is effective enough to justify its cost to the taxpayer.
		Immunization is the only precaution necessary to guarantee a child's health.

这题正确答案选择E，请问为什么C是错的，解析说[size=14.6667px] the author believes that immunization will ensure kids' health. That doesn't mean that lack[size=14.6667px] of immunization will lead all to disease vulnerability.  我不理解的是，这里不应该是根据选项是否可以推出结论来做判断的么，解析为什么是根据结论推导不出选项来判断C是错的呀？

Bradz

C是明显的“if no X, no Y; then, X means Y”的逻辑错误。比如我不好好学习，我就不及格；但是我好好学习了，我就一定及格。这个逻辑的瑕疵可以看出来么？

回到原题。学校假设“不实施免疫，学生会得病”；这不能够得出“实施了免疫，学生就不得病”的结论。所以这个假设是不成立的。

ccp92

Bradz 发表于 2016-11-19 12:31
C是明显的“if no X, no Y; then, X means Y”的逻辑错误。比如我不好好学习，我就不及格；但是我好好学习 ...

同意！               

windowshade

我也想选C啊，逻辑太TMD难了。

前提：不免疫多数孩子可能会得病／免疫是唯一能提前保证孩子健康的方法， 因此尽管免疫很贵，政府也要保证所有的学校都要上免疫设备让孩子们都免疫。

看哪个更通顺吧