JUSTIFY CONCLUSION题型的极度困惑！

hhl3000

LAYWER-1  大仙讲的JUSTIFY CONCLUSION题型中说也可以是充分性题型，也就是那个选项使结论合理推出。其TEST为：前提+答案=结论。和一般的假设题不一样？我怎么死活看不出有什么不一样啊，都是架桥的必要条件啊！例题有，大家说说有什么不同啊？

OG

19. Even though most universities retain the royalties from faculty members’ inventions, the faculty members retain the royalties from books and articles they write. Therefore, faculty members should retain the royalties from the educational computer software they develop.
The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?
A. Royalties from inventions are higher than royalties from educational software programs.
B. Faculty members are more likely to produce educational software programs than inventions.
C. Inventions bring more prestige to universities that do books and articles.
D. In the experience of most universities, educational software programs are more marketable that are books and articles.
E. In terms of the criteria used to award royalties, educational software programs are more nearly comparable to books and articles than to inventions.

92. According to the new office smoking regulations, only employees who have enclosed office may smoke at their desks. Virtually all employees with enclosed offices are at the professional level, and virtually all secretarial employees lack enclosed offices. Therefore, secretaries who smoke should be offered enclosed offices.

Which of the following is an assumption that enables the conclusion above to be properly drawn?

(A) Employees at the professional level who do not smoke should keep their enclosed offices.

(B) Employees with enclosed offices should not smoke at their desks, even though the new regulations permit them to do so.

(C) Employees at the secretarial level should be allowed to smoke at their desks, even if they do not have enclosed

(D) The smoking regulations should allow all employees who smoke an equal opportunity to do so, regardless of an employee’s job level.

(E) The smoking regulations should provide equal protection from any hazards associated with smoking to all employees who do not smoke.

lukrenee

个人以为GMAT的逻辑题基本上都是靠常识就能正确解出来的，不需要专业的逻辑学知识（那个会把你绕晕的，因为考试的时候没有时间去思考逻辑学的知识点，而且基本上所有考题都是靠常识和直觉就能解决的。要达到LAWYER那样把逻辑学原理运用自如的境界，不是几个月就能达到的，也可以说是杀鸡用牛刀。而一旦陷在里面会消耗大量的时间和精力，而结果如何还是个未知数。考GMAT是不需要专业逻辑学知识）。偶考的时候只是看OG，没有进行逻辑方面的训练，建议LZ先做题然后啃OG的解释。

lukrenee

当然题目有乐一定量的积累可以作分析归类，把出题类型和考点（比如说选项与题目不相关，选项任意扩大或缩小题干定义的内涵和外延，或者偷换概念等）。建议可以先找一本中文的MBA联考的逻辑部分，花个三四天时间把中文题型分析一下，那个MBA联考题很多都是GMAT原题搬过来的。

其实偶想说的是，关键是建立一种逻辑思维方式，语言只是工具。

注意：MBA逻辑联考参考书中有关数学推理及智力题之类的题不用看（比如说某人被杀，四个嫌疑人ABCD，给出条件一二三四然后要你判断是谁杀的这一类，这个在GMAT中是不会考的。）

只是个人建议，仅供参考~~

crystal2003

OG的解释有些看不明白，感觉看也像是在说费话似的。

真是郁闷。怎么办？

lukrenee

OG是圣经，没有一句废话，请静下心来仔细研读才是。OG的解释是精髓，好过其它所有的辅导材料~~

hhl3000

谢谢斑竹姐姐   那谁会这两种题型的差别呢？JUSTIFY CONCLUSION题型何一般的假设题？？？

maomm

rt

maomm

re~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FFFFFanfan

我也想问！！！！！我也有这个疑惑！！！！

FFFFFanfan

求解啊求大牛啊啊啊啊啊啊啊