ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3695|回复: 15
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教两个逻辑

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-11-3 19:47:00 | 只看该作者

请教两个逻辑

T4,assumption
In the year following one eight-cent increase in the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes, sales of cigarettes fell ten percent. In contrast , in the year prior to the tax income , sales has fallen on one percent. The volume of cigarettes sales is therefore strongly related to the after-tax price of a pack of cigarettes.
A.    During the year following the tax increase, the pretax price of a pack of cigarettes did not increase by as much as it had during the year prior to the tax increase.
B.    The one percent fall in cigarette sales in the year prior to tax income was due to a smaller tax increase.
C.    The pretax price of a pack of cigarettes gradually decreased throughout the year before and after the tax increase.
D.    For the year following the tax increase, the pretax price of a pack of cigarettes was not eight or more cents lower than it had been the previous year.
E.    As the after-tax price of a pack of cigarette rises , the pretax price also rises.
Ans;D , I choose B。B若否定了,就得不出结论了。不明白D为何是假设???D讲的是pretax price of cigarettes,是无关啊???

T28
Certain politicians in the country of B argue that a 50 percent that tax on new automobiles would halt the rapid increase of automobiles in B’s roads and thereby slow the deterioation of B’s air quality Although most exerts agree that such a tax would result in fewer B buying new vehicles and gradually reduce the number of automobiles on B’s roads, they contend that it would have little impact on B’s air-quality problem.
Which of the following, if true in B, would most strongly support the expert’s contention about the effect of  the proposal automobile tax on B’s air-quality problem.?
A.    Automobile emissions are the largest singly source of air pollution.
B.    Some of the proceeds from the new tax would go toward expanding the nonpolluting commuter rail system.
C.    Currently , the sales tax on new tax on new automobiles is considerably lower than 50 percent.
D.    Automobiles  become less fuel efficient and therefore contribute to more to air pollution as they age.
E.    The scrapping of automobiles cause insignificant amount of air pollution
Ans, I choose E, 答案是不是错了。D正好相反了啊????

谢谢。
沙发
发表于 2003-11-3 22:12:00 | 只看该作者
T4:
D . Pre-tax price + tax = after-tax price
   
     Evidence:  

     re-tax price1 + tax = after-tax price1
     re-tax price2 + tax + .o8 = after-tax price2
  
     Conclusion: sales relate to after-tax price of  1 Cigar.

    The necessary assumption of this argument is: after-tax price 2 > after-tax price 1.

    This happen only when: pre-tax price 2 + .08 > pre-tax price 1

   So D is correct:  the pretax price of a pack of cigarettes was not eight or more   cents  lower than ---previous yr.


板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2003-11-3 22:33:00 | 只看该作者
谢谢joice JJ,我明白了。这题有点跟数学似的,我读完后就晕了。
地板
发表于 2003-11-3 22:40:00 | 只看该作者
T28:

The stimulus state two arguments from two groups of people: Certain politicians and experts.

The Q ask you to support the expert’s contention:
new tax policy would have little impact on B’s air-quality problem.



Most exerts believe that people will buy fewer automobiles. Since fewer new autos will available,  people'll continue to use automobiles that they own. These old autos become less fuel efficient and cause more air pollution.

So D. strengthen experts' point that new tax policy would have little impact on B's air-quality problem, or it may even worsen the situation.











[此贴子已经被作者于2003-11-4 10:52:09编辑过]
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-11-4 08:50:00 | 只看该作者
我的理解是这样的,请指正.

政治家认为:提税==>减少车辆==>减少污染

专家认为:减少了车辆,对污染的减少没什么影响.

E:支持了对污染的减少没什么影响,

D:认为对减少污染.

所以应该选E啊.D说得相反了.

they contend that it would have little impact on B’s air-quality problem.这才是专家的意见啊.

请大家帮助.



















6#
发表于 2003-11-4 09:54:00 | 只看该作者
MM, 你咋看D的,好象你没写完D?
D我认为是:减少了车辆,等车用长久了,会造成更多环境污染。
所以支持了专家观点:如你说的,减少了车辆, 对污染的减少没什么影响。反而可能恶化环境。

继续讨论,谢谢。


[此贴子已经被作者于2003-11-4 10:10:36编辑过]
7#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-11-4 11:13:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用joice在2003-11-4 9:54:00的发言:
MM, 你咋看D的,好象你没写完D?
D我认为是:减少了车辆,等车用长久了,会造成更多环境污染。
所以支持了专家观点:如你说的,减少了车辆, 对污染的减少没什么影响。反而可能恶化环境。

继续讨论,谢谢。


[此贴子已经被作者于2003-11-4 10:10:36编辑过]


joice jj ,谢谢你的回答.

我认为D:汽车不那么fuel effiency ,当车子老化时,会造成更大的空气污染.

可是结论只是说:汽车的减少,对污染的减少没有多大的影响.

D并不能支持结论啊.

相反地:E说:汽车的scrapping对空气的污染的影响无足轻重.那可不是支持了结论了吗?

希望我不要理解错了.
8#
发表于 2003-11-4 11:54:00 | 只看该作者
E. The scrapping of automobiles cause insignificant amount of air pollution

E.我觉地是:
减少车俩 导致少量空气污染?所以不加强expert的观点。
insignificant amount, not insignificant impact.

继续讨论
9#
发表于 2003-11-4 13:57:00 | 只看该作者
我的意见:
E这个选项是一个无关项,主要在于对它意思的理解,它的意思是说:
汽车销毁造成的空气污染很小。而题目主要focus在汽车数量对污染的影响。
题目在要求support expert, 也就是weaken politicians.
题目实际暗含一个数量关系,也就是 数量*每个汽车的平均污染量 = 总污染量。
politician指出数量的减少-〉总污染量减少,
B指出,数量虽然少了,但是每个汽车的平均污染量缺增加了,所以总污染量并没有少,所以削弱了politician, support了expert.
10#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-11-4 15:32:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用dandan74在2003-11-4 13:57:00的发言:
我的意见:
E这个选项是一个无关项,主要在于对它意思的理解,它的意思是说:
汽车销毁造成的空气污染很小。而题目主要focus在汽车数量对污染的影响。
题目在要求support expert, 也就是weaken politicians.
题目实际暗含一个数量关系,也就是 数量*每个汽车的平均污染量 = 总污染量。
politician指出数量的减少-〉总污染量减少,
B指出,数量虽然少了,但是每个汽车的平均污染量缺增加了,所以总污染量并没有少,所以削弱了politician, support了expert.


dandan,我明白你的意思了.我现在能理解D为何对了.

可是我仍不理解E为何是无关.E说:汽车对空气的污染小.那么汽车总量的减少,对空气的污染也减少.咦,这不是反对了expert的观点了???

我感觉在逻辑中,有这种隐含的数学概念的题,我经常读不出来其中的关系,不知有没有什么好办法啊?

谢谢.
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, 2025-9-8 23:29
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