天山7 -21 的讨论

yogaII

天山7套的21题, 题目如下.

普遍的答案都选B, 我认为选E.
题目所说, 一种改良的种子, 一种普通种子. 用改良的种子的人用杀虫剂仅比用普通种子的人少一点. 而改良种子比普通种子贵不少.
鉴于改良种子和普通种子产量相当, 改用新种子并没有太大经济价值.
问以下可以用来评价该命题.
B是无关项, 比较棉花和其他作物?
E说 是否改用改良种子的人以前不得不用非常大量的杀虫剂. 回答该问题就有提供了一个比较项,
A: 现在用特殊种子的, B: 现在仍然用普通种子的.
那就是大家都用普通种子时, A不得不比B用多的多的杀虫剂, 而现在, A却和B用相当的杀虫剂, 那么显然新种子是有价值的.
如果大家都用普通种子, A和B用一样多的杀虫剂, 则说明新种子无价值.
 
请各位指教.


Scientists have made genetic modifications to cotton to increase its resistance to insect
pests. According to farmers’ report, the amount of insecticide needed per acre to control
insect pests was only slightly lower for those who tried the modified seed than for those
who did not. Therefore, since the modified seed costs more than ordinary seed without
producing yields of higher market value, switching to the modified seed would be
unlikely to benefit most cotton farmers economically.

Which of the following would it be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument?
A. Whether farmers who tried the modified cotton seed had ever tried growing other
crops from genetically modified seed
B. Whether the insecticides typically used on ordinary cotton tend to be more
expensive than insecticides typically used on other crops
C. Whether for most farmers who grow cotton it is their primary crop
D. Whether the farmers who have tried the modified seed planted as many acres of
cotton, on average, as farmers using the ordinary seed did
E. Whether most of the farmers who tried the modified seed did so because they had
previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide

yogaII

各位大虾不屑指教吗? 我看了讨论链接, 基本时讨论B和D. 没有人认为E时正确选项. 很奇怪.

cx1205

我觉得只有b和d和经济挂上边了,不过我觉得b做为正确答案有点牵强,还得请高人指点

yogaII

请问我的推理哪里错误了呢?
E

gonghao

http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardID=24&ID=79594&page=1

for your reference.

E,of course ,has been discussed a lot.Just focus on the content listed by lawyer_1

As you said ,the answer is haunt between B and E.But I prefer B a lot.

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-26 12:53:43编辑过]

gonghao

From my point of view,the conclusion was drawn beacuse of two reasons.First is the slightly reduction of the insecticde consumption.Second ,the profits new seed made is no more than the older one.

If E is the answer ,let's give it a test.

If E is true,most of the farmers tried the modified seed because they had previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.And right now,the consumption of the insecticide reduced slightly ,hence the conclusion that there is no need to turn to new seed is absolutely right.

If E is wrong,most of the farmers tried the modified seed but they did not previously use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.Combined with the truth discussed in the argument,the conclusion will be probably drawn again since the consumption of insecticide reduced slightly and no more profits were created by the new seed.

So no matter choice E is right or wrong ,it always gives conclusion a support.Hence,I think E is not the best answer.

---------------------------------

Choice B has been discussed very clear by lawyer in the discuss thread listed above.

Open to discuss...

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-26 13:09:28编辑过]

yogaII

Thank you for your detailed information. However, I believe you misunderstood the whole context. I think the basic point is to find what's missing. In order to evaluate whether ppl should change to the new seed, we need to know the groundtruth. Here, we know group A uses similar amount of insectcide as group B NOW, but if A had to use much more than B previously, it's clear that the new seed works.

Ok, furthermore, I think your explanation was not accurate. lease see following in CAPITAL as my correction. Feel free to let me know what you think.

Actually I am pretty sure E is the right answer and I just don't understant why so many ppl choose B.

if E is true, most of the farmers tried the modified seed because they had previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide. AND RIGHT NOW, THE CONSUMPTION OF THE INSECTICIDE IS SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN OTHERS, which means it reduced a lot compared with the consumption used before by those people. HENCE, it's important to use the new seeds.

以下是引用gonghao在2006-9-26 13:08:00的发言：

From my point of view,the conclusion was drawn beacuse of two reasons.First is the slightly reduction of the insecticde consumption.Second ,the profits new seed made is no more than the older one.

If E is the answer ,let's give it a test.

If E is true,most of the farmers tried the modified seed because they had previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.And right now,the consumption of the insecticide reduced slightly ,hence the conclusion that there is no need to turn to new seed is absolutely right.

If E is wrong,most of the farmers tried the modified seed but they did not previously use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.Combined with the truth discussed in the argument,the conclusion will be probably drawn again since the consumption of insecticide reduced slightly and no more profits were created by the new seed.

So no matter choice E is right or wrong ,it always gives conclusion a support.Hence,I think E is not the best answer.

---------------------------------

Choice B has been discussed very clear by lawyer in the discuss thread listed above.

Open to discuss...

yogaII

ok, just read the previous discussion. I still choose E since I the reason is pretty strong.

B is not clear since you have to assume that "THE OTHER CROPS" include the new modified cotton, which is very weird and vague.I would say, without E, I would choose B.

gonghao

AND RIGHT NOW, THE CONSUMPTION OF THE INSECTICIDE IS SLIGHTLY
        LOWER THAN OTHERS, which means it reduced a lot compared with the consumption used before by those people. HENCE, it's important to use the new seeds.

pls pay attention ,slightly means very samll and trivial,

it does not mean "a lot" as you think.So in my analysis ,if E is ture ,the conlusion will be drawn in a right way.

yogaII

:-) I think you misunderstood what I meant.

BEFORE: with the old food, A had to eat 80 lbs to survive and B had to eat 40 lbs

NOW:       with the new food, A eat 38 lbs, B eat 40 lbs (old food)

The argument provides information shown in NOW. and E provides information shown in BEFORE.

Even if the new food maybe more expensive than the old food, by switching to new food, ppl can save money. Why? because A eat 38lbs and B will eat about 20lbs then...

Anyway, stop here since I can convince myself and I believe different person just has different viewpoint.

以下是引用gonghao在2006-9-26 20:40:00的发言：

AND RIGHT NOW, THE CONSUMPTION OF THE INSECTICIDE IS SLIGHTLY
  LOWER THAN OTHERS, which means it reduced a lot compared with the consumption used before by those people. HENCE, it's important to use the new seeds.

pls pay attention ,slightly means very samll and trivial,

it does not mean "a lot" as you think.So in my analysis ,if E is ture ,the conlusion will be drawn in a right way.

SURE, please read again, A is slightly lower than B now.
        Before, A had to use much more than A use now. So, for A, switching from old seed to new seed saves lots of insectcide. So the new seed is good, period.