Richard 770 逻辑答题讨论

RichardVeritas

谢谢鼓励支持！

回头再找些题目应用，看看这个思路能否比较简单帮助大家。

看下上面几个题目，第一步关键是找出逻辑上两个或多个孤岛（点）。B 一般是结论，或者目地。作者费半天劲想说明什么？A 则是作者说我为什么可以这么说，论据。

逻辑推理的过程就是针对A->B分析，漏洞在哪，这么找茬，或帮助增强，或者哪些信息会帮助我们考核这个A->B（和漏洞会相关）。Again，如果A和B一模一样，就没得分析了。所以分析时紧扣A和B不一样的地方，它们之间的关系来考核答案。

RichardVeritas

非OG题

Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from an independent supplier a product or service that a company has previously provided for itself.  Vernon, Inc., a small manufacturing company that has in recent years experienced a decline in its profits, plans to boost its profits by outsourcing those parts of its business that independent suppliers can provide at lower cost than Vernon can itself.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the prediction that Vernon's plan will achieve its goal?

(A) Among the parts of its business that Vernon does not plan to outsource are some that require standards of accuracy too high for most independent suppliers to provide at lower cost than Vernon can.
(B) Vernon itself acts as an independent supplier of specialized hardware items to certain manufacturers that formerly made those items themselves.
(C) Relatively few manufacturers that start as independent suppliers have been able to expand their business and become direct competitors of the companies they once supplied.
(D) Vernon plans to select the independent suppliers it will use on the basis of submitted bids.
(E) Attending to certain tasks that Vernon performs relatively inefficiently has taken up much of the time and effort of top managers whose time would have been better spent attending to Vernon's core business.

1. 找出argument & line of argument
通过把有些部门业务外包到成本更低提供商，来提高公司盈利

2. 分析逻辑
两个逻辑事物
A 把有些部门业务外包到成本更低提供商
B 提高公司盈利

GAP 找茬 - (有什么原因A推不到B) 举几个例子：1）成本低并不代表盈利高。如果外包后质量下降，售价下跌，盈利不会提高。2）如果外包这些部门影响别的部门成本上升，整个公司盈利不一定提高。大家不用在找茬上花太多时间，但一定要清楚看到A和B是不同的两个点。

3. 答案
E 答案 - V公司高层管理现在忙一些低效的业务，她们时间如果花在核心业务上更加有效 -》 这些业务就是可以外包的业务。高层干inefficiently，外包就会降低成本。支持辅助A-》B。商业现实中也经常看到这样的运作。
A- 无关，关于V不打算外包的业务
B- 无关，V向别人提供外包的业务
C- tricky，有一定的支持，但是不太直接。C说独立供应商一般无法通过提供外包业务发展成为直接竞争对手。减少V对盈利的担心（更多市场竞争会带来盈利压力），所以有一定支持。可能不如E直接。另外也说明这个题C选项会引起一定争议。相比之下，OG题目应该更加严格审查过。见下面类似OG题。大家不用钻牛角尖，有争议的题目即使碰到也可能是试验，应该不会计分。
D- 无关。V怎么选供应商来降低费用，都只属于A范围内，无关A-》B。

Richard 770 逻辑答题讨论
http://forum.chasedream.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1303467&fromuid=1294035

RichardVeritas

OG题目

Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from an independent supplier a product or service that a company has previously provided for itself. Since a company’s chief objective is to realize the highest possible year-end profits, any product or service that can be obtained from an independent supplier for less than it would cost the company to provide the product or service on its own should be outsourced.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A)  If a company decides to use independent suppliers for a product, it can generally exploit the vigorous competition arising among several firms that are interested in supplying that product.
(B)  Successful outsourcing requires a company to provide its suppliers with information about its products and plans that can fall into the hands of its competitors and give them a business
advantage.
(C)  Certain tasks, such as processing a company’s payroll, are commonly outsourced, whereas others, such as handling the company’s core business, are not.
(D)  For a company to provide a product or service for itself as efficiently as an independent supplier can provide it, the managers involved need to be as expert in the area of that product or service as the people in charge of that product or
service at an independent supplier are.
(E)  When a company decides to use an independent supplier for a product or service, the independent supplier sometimes hires members of the company’s staff who formerly made the product or provided the service that the independent supplier now supplies.


1. 找出argument & line of argument
通过把有些部门业务外包到成本更低提供商，来提高公司盈利

2. 分析逻辑
两个逻辑事物
A 把有些部门业务外包到成本更低提供商
B 提高公司盈利

GAP 找茬 - (有什么原因A推不到B) 举几个例子：1）成本低并不代表盈利高。如果外包后质量下降，售价下跌，盈利不会提高。2）如果外包这些部门影响别的部门成本上升，整个公司盈利不一定提高。大家不用在找茬上花太多时间，但一定要清楚看到A和B是不同的两个点。

3. 答案
B- 答案 - 外包会导致公司机密泄漏到竞争对手手中，影响公司市场竞争。这样有可能影响公司盈利，所以削弱A-》B。大家看这个削弱和我上面举例的找茬有类似之处。做题时一般不会直接预感出答案找的GAP，也用不着花时间预想这么多，但如果你清楚看到A和B的不同，你看到有关答案可以支持或反驳A-》B时会很有信心的选择。
A- 无关。可以解释外包成本低，但那只是既定假设A，无关A-》B
C- 无关 - 什么业务外包，什么业务不外包，无关A-》B
D- 无关，要达到外包商的效率，公司负责人要像外包商那样成为专家。说一点支持可能比较牵强（不用成为那样专家可以省钱时间在别的业务上），但至少不削弱。
E- tricky无关，有一点削弱debatable，但是至少不如B直接。外包商可能会雇佣公司之前做这些业务的人。如果说削弱，可以讲共识这些人本来是重要的，被挖走，影响公司业务／盈利。但是另外一个角度，外包后公司一般会把这些业务裁员，所以外包商雇佣不雇佣这些被裁的人，根本不影响公司。后者更家符合一般公司外包的实际情况，所以E削弱很牵强。

sherry475

楼主我想问这个题。OG17-604
Coffee shop owner: A large number of customers will pay at least the fair market value for a cup of coffee, even if there is no formal charge. Some will pay more than this out of appreciation of the trust that is placed in them. And our total number of customers is likely to increase. We could therefore improve our net cash flow by implementing an honor system in which customers pay what they wish for coffee by depositing money in a can.

Manager: We're likely to lose money on this plan. Many customers would cheat the system, paying a very small sum or nothing at all.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the owner's plan, in light of the manager's concern?


The new system, if implemented, would increase the number of customers.


By roasting its own coffee, the shop has managed to reduce the difficulties (and cost) of maintaining an inventory of freshly roasted coffee.


Many customers stay in the cafe for long stretches of time.


The shop makes a substantial profit from pastries and other food bought by the coffee drinkers.


No other coffee shop in the area has such a system.

RichardVeritas

sherry475 发表于 2017-8-10 15:11
楼主我想问这个题。OG17-604
Coffee shop owner: A large number of customers will pay at least the fair ...

OG17-604
Coffee shop owner: A large number of customers will pay at least the fair market value for a cup of coffee, even if there is no formal charge. Some will pay more than this out of appreciation of the trust that is placed in them. And our total number of customers is likely to increase. We could therefore improve our net cash flow by implementing an honor system in which customers pay what they wish for coffee by depositing money in a can.
Manager: We're likely to lose money on this plan. Many customers would cheat the system, paying a very small sum or nothing at all.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the owner's plan, in light of the manager's concern?

A. The new system, if implemented, would increase the number of customers.
B. By roasting its own coffee, the shop has managed to reduce the difficulties (and cost) of maintaining an inventory of freshly roasted coffee.
C. Many customers stay in the cafe for long stretches of time.
D. The shop makes a substantial profit from pastries and other food bought by the coffee drinkers.
E. No other coffee shop in the area has such a system.

之前的回复：

个人理解用排除法。
两人讨论关键区别是收入，这样改变是会多挣，少挣，或者亏钱。
B和E 都无关
A 客户会多 -- 但是如果客户不花钱，没用
C 客户呆时间长 -- 但是如果客户不花钱，还是没用
D 相对最好答案 -- 指出除了咖啡挣钱以外， 点心还挣钱。如果客户增加，点心上挣的钱会增加

套用上面思路再分析一下：
1. 找出argument & line of argument
O:
目的 - 提高盈利。
方法 - 咖啡让客户自由付费
理由 - 大多数客户会自觉付全额甚至更多。这样做增加客户流量->提高盈利
M:
反驳 - 咖啡大多数客户会不付钱或付极少

问题：
support the owner's plan, in light of the manager's concern？
就是说如果M说的对，咖啡大多数客户会不付钱或付极少, 哪个选项会支持O的计划？

2. 分析逻辑
两个逻辑事物
A 咖啡大多数客户付不付足够钱 - 咖啡会不会亏（假设客户人数增加）
B 咖啡馆盈利与否

GAP 找茬：这样一看D正是这样一个连接。除了咖啡以外，咖啡馆还有别的收入。

如果从支持O角度看：
A 咖啡大多数客户不付足够钱 - 咖啡亏，（假设客户人数增加）
B 咖啡馆盈利

就看哪个答案可以帮助A->B.  D. 客人额外消费甜点/食物客观，这样人数增加，可以起到支持B作用
其它选项看上面。除了C有潜在的连接可能，其它明显无关。
一般无关选项会基于A或B展开衍生，说一些相关内容Context, 但是和A->B无关。想想如果你出题，如何出混淆选项？这是一个必用的方法来混淆听众，让你觉得每个选项都有点关系。必须理清逻辑，紧紧抓住A->B的推理连接来考核。

sherry475

RichardVeritas 发表于 2017-8-11 04:30
OG17-604
Coffee shop owner: A large number of customers will pay at least the fair market value for  ...

楼主我终于知道我问题在哪儿了！读问题的时候我直接看了best support the plan,没有关注到in light of the manager's concern。其实这边问的问题应该是 在人们付很少钱的情况下，加强实施这个措施也能达到目的。而不是仅仅只问加强实施措施也能达到目的。

RichardVeritas

sherry475 发表于 2017-8-11 13:04
楼主我终于知道我问题在哪儿了！读问题的时候我直接看了best support the plan,没有关注到in light of th ...

Glad you figured it out.  Devil is in the details

如果读题仔细和逻辑思维严密，逻辑题还是比较好做的。逻辑训练目标应该尽量缩短读懂题之后找出答案的时间。逻辑思维是和语言无关的。这个通过训练是可以和英文母语考生相比不占任何劣势的。这样可以给多点时间去读逻辑题目，做RC／SC，弥补我们语言上的劣势。

YyYyYyyyyYY123

赞楼主！！！！有个问题，就是考试时做逻辑读题总感觉飘着静不下心，题目返回看2,3遍才行很费时间，有时读完题目对前面的内容又留不太深刻的印象还得往回看，这种问题可以通过怎么联系提高呢？

RichardVeritas

YyYyYyyyyYY123 发表于 2017-8-11 22:35
赞楼主！！！！有个问题，就是考试时做逻辑读题总感觉飘着静不下心，题目返回看2,3遍才行很费时间，有时读 ...

谢谢鼓励！

你这个问题很好。我想因人而异，写点个人建议：

首先，听你的问题，我觉得 FOCUS 精力高度集中是关键。练习做题和模考时，不要贪多。一次就做10道逻辑题，但是精力高度集中。累了困了别做。当人高度集中时，人脑的潜能很大，临时记忆能力强，和懒散的做效果完全不同。要多练习这种高质量的学习训练。自己感受一下有否区别，期待听你的感受。

然后具体化，我们把这个挑战分解。可以说两部分。1 阅读看懂。2. 清晰的逻辑分析

1. 先说逻辑分析。像上面分析的简单思路，首先搞清楚讨论的几个逻辑孤岛（一般两个A，B）。然后紧扣A->B来理解正反两方如何声辩A到B，或A到不了B。找到A和B之后，很容易应该意识到它们之间不同，不一定要把漏洞找出来，但当你意识到它们不是一回事，有人告诉你一个漏洞时，你会有“是那么回事”的感觉。这个逻辑分析也会有难易。如果你对每个题都这么搞清楚来训练，会提高自己的逻辑分析能力。

抛开GMAT和英文，可以自己评估一下逻辑数理分析能力。数学好的学生一般思维严密，因为不能跳跃，都得证明。如果你听朋友争辩，你是属于思路敏捷，伶牙俐齿那类，朋友们争辩什么说一大堆，你一下就听出争辩的关键（到底是争什么，即这些逻辑孤岛和它们的联系），还是比较慢，理不出头绪？如果属于后者，逻辑分析能力就有待提高。英文阅读会雪上加霜。

2. 阅读看懂
其实逻辑阅读应该不难。比RC部分要轻松很多。阅读量有限，2-3句话，生难词不多，没有结构变化。而且阅读时不需要考虑很多细节（像RC作者态度，内容细节等等）。

逻辑阅读可以快速扫过，紧扣目标，就是到底是争论什么。因为它一定有这个信息在里面，偶尔读不懂的词或句式可以往这个方向猜，读完一定找到矛盾体。举例假如两方争辩，那反方的话即使你只看懂80%，那另外20%可能不重要的细节可以忽略，如果重要也可能可以根据正方的话猜出来，因为它们必然相反。所以逻辑阅读是紧扣这个找到矛盾／争辩主题读大方向。我看一些同学纠结于个别词汇，思路不对。除非关键词汇像否定或支持这样可以让逻辑意义变化很大的词汇，其它对逻辑分析影响不大。

所以逻辑阅读建议快速扫读，抓大局，找矛盾体。有时如果题目绕，一遍没读懂，再读1-2遍就看明白了。如果这样读，2-3遍花的时间也不长。

读题时，先不要看答案。看不看题干都可以。找到矛盾体和GAP思路之后，哪种题干都好办。

找到矛盾体和GAP思路之后，如果读的太快，细节没花时间，可以再review一下。这时只有和矛盾体或争辩相关的细节才重要。像上面16楼同学漏过的题干中的in light of the manager's concern就是逻辑争辩上的一个重要细节。


之后就是分析答案了。读答案也是一样，如果你看懂了A-B的辩论，看答案是针对性很强地看。看上面一些例题分析，如果选项只关于A， 或B， 但无关A-B，应该是轻松的无关选项，不用花时间读懂细节。如果看完5个，没有正确感强的答案，再读一遍，有可能漏过了一些比较隐蔽的A-B关联解释。 找到正确答案时应该很高兴和自信。


所以逻辑阅读其实应该是目标针对性很强的一种阅读方式。和RC各方面都要照应相比，应该容易不少。


不是太绕的逻辑题，应该在1分多一点，就能有80-90%的把握选择答案，然后move on. 要向这样的目标练习。


啰嗦了这么多，欢迎考虑实践一下，来谈谈感受。

RichardVeritas

OG16 CR 38

Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning a considerable number of officers from traffic enforcement to work on higher-priority, serious crimes. Reducing traffic enforcement for this reason would be counterproductive, however, in light of the tendency of criminals to use cars when engaged in the commission of serious crimes. An officer stopping a car for a traffic violation can make a search that turns up evidence of serious crime. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument given? (A) An officer who stops a car containing evidence of the commission of a serious crime risks a violent confrontation, even if the vehicle was stopped only for a traffic violation. (B) When the public becomes aware that traffic enforcement has lessened, it typically becomes lax in obeying traffic rules. (C) Those willing to break the law to commit serious crimes are often in committing such crimes unwilling to observe what they regard as the lesser constraints of traffic law.（那些愿意犯严重罪的人经常不愿意遵守他们看起来有较少约束的交通法） (D) The offenders committing serious crimes who would be caught because of traffic violations are not the same group of individuals as those who would be caught if the arresting officers were reassigned from traffic enforcement. (E) The great majority of persons who are stopped by officers for traffic violations are not guilty of any serious crimes. 我选答案C。 作者论点- 不应该把交警派去刑侦重罪 逻辑链 重罪犯一般开车作案 如果重罪犯违反交通（注意这个潜在的假设），交警会拦下来，可以同时发现重罪线索 C的支持是 （那些愿意犯严重罪的人经常不愿意遵守他们看起来有较少约束的交通法） 如果用白话说就是 重罪犯一般作案时，根本不屌交通规则。 这个补充很完美： 重罪犯在作案时会违反交通，这样交警就会把他们拦下来了。完美地补上了逻辑链中的一个假设。 答案C如果写这个白话“重罪犯一般作案时，根本不屌交通规则。”，题目难度就会降低一些。出题者有意把这个支持一般化（abstraction, generalization)，这样如果你没有办法看清其中的指代关系，就觉得这个没什么关系。大家应该多熟悉些这种一般化的说法。看玩笑时想想怎样把简单的事，搞得高大上。是一个道理。答案看到这种明显一般化的选项，一定要多读多想一下。