ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2998|回复: 7
打印 上一主题 下一主题

一道具有典型意义的逻辑题,大家分析分析

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-10-16 12:46:00 | 只看该作者

一道具有典型意义的逻辑题,大家分析分析

in order to justify the merger of two banks, two things must be accomplished: first, the cost of the merger must not exceed one billion dollars; second, the bank created by the merger must retain the two former bank's customers。 The newly formed bank cannot keep those customers, however, unless it avoids claims of discrimination by earnmarking at least ten billion dollars for loans to low-income customers. If the bank cannot keep its customers, it cannot keep the cost of the merger from exceeding one billion dollars. So, it follows that if the new bank earnmarks ten billion dollars in loans, it will keep the cost of the merger from exceeding one billion dollars.

the reasoning in the argument is not valid because it fails to establish that:
a. many successfully merged banks have earnmarked loan money
b.some unsuccessful mergers cost less than one billlion dollars
c.earnmarking loan money is sufficient to guarantee customer loyalty
d. earnmarking loan money is necessary to guarantee customer loyalty
e. many mergered banks that experienced costly mergers have not earnmarked loan money.

手敲的,难免有错。大家分析一下,会有收获的
请给出你的理由来支持或反对。


[此贴子已经被作者于2003-10-16 12:48:23编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2003-10-16 18:47:00 | 只看该作者
抛砖先,我的理解是D,从unless来。
板凳
发表于 2003-10-16 20:06:00 | 只看该作者
为什么我觉得选C
他没有establish这个earmarking是sufficient的,只告诉我们这个试necessary的,怎么能推出后来的东西呢?
地板
发表于 2003-10-16 20:42:00 | 只看该作者
对,应该是C,A除非B,等价于非B则A,即是C的命题,呵呵。
5#
发表于 2003-10-17 00:22:00 | 只看该作者
success=>(less1B +retain)
earnmaking=>retain
less1B=>retain
--------------------------
earnmaking=>less1B

推不出C

答案C
6#
发表于 2003-10-17 09:37:00 | 只看该作者
我觉得是C!

我是这么推的——
it not avoids claims of discrimination by earnmarking at least ten billion dollars for loans to low-income customers =》The newly formed bank cannot keep those customers =》it cannot keep the cost of the merger from exceeding one billion dollars

直接取他的逆否命题!

所以是必要而非充分条件呀!


[此贴子已经被作者于2003-10-17 9:38:21编辑过]
7#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-10-17 10:03:00 | 只看该作者
答案是C。
nickynicky分析的直逼要害。这道题是有关于sufficient and necessary.
cannot......unless  
可简化为if a then b结够。
提供的是从a到b充分条件,反过来b到a却不是充分条件条件。
本题后面的推导是错误的,原因就是

以下是引用nickynicky在2003-10-16 20:06:00的发言:
为什么我觉得选C
他没有establish这个earmarking是sufficient的,只告诉我们这个试necessary的,怎么能推出后来的东西呢?





8#
发表于 2003-10-20 17:55:00 | 只看该作者
但我觉得错误不在于此。
能不能keep customers是第二件事,当然我们推不出the new bank earnmarks ten billion dollars in loans,就能KEEP customers.
第一件事是the cost of the merger must not exceed one billion dollars。
这两件事是分开的,从第二件事的必要条件怎么能推出第一件事呢?

C即使是SUFFICENT的,也得不出原文的结论啊
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-8-11 21:51
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部