OG11-20

dennyhuang

请教一道弱智CR，大家帮忙看看，查了逻辑专区，发现本题但问题没解决。

CR 20

The number of people diagnosed as having a certain intestinal disease has dropped significantly in a rural county this year, as compared to last year. Health officials attribute this decrease entirely to improved sanitary conditions at water-treatment plants, which made for cleaner water this year and thus reduced the incidence of the disease.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the health officials' explanation for the lower incidence of the disease?

(A)        Many new water-treatment plants have been built in the last five years in the rural county.

(B)        Bottled spring water has not been consumed in significantly different quantities by people diagnosed as having the intestinal disease, as compared to people who did not contract the disease.

(C)       Because of a new diagnostic technique, many people who until this year would have been diagnosed as having the intestinal disease are now correctly diagnosed as suffering from intestinal ulcers.

(D)       Because of medical advances this year, far fewer people who contract the intestinal disease will develop severe cases of the disease.

(E)     The water in the rural county was brought up to the sanitary standards of the water in

明显C正确，属于它因削弱，但同学们看看B，我觉得B也有点道理，虽然相比C，B的削弱作用不明显

B说瓶装水在得病和不得病的人之间饮用的数量几乎一样。我理解瓶装水是sanitary condition improved 的水，应该饮用多的人不得病，饮用少的人会可能得病。但这两组人却在饮水数量上没有区别，这不是也是削弱吗？要是题目把not去掉不就是加强了吗，那有not不是有削弱的意思吗。

 

本人有时钻进牛角尖就出不来，这个习惯真是害人害己。

yaoyao99

以下是引用crowkiller在2007-5-18 2:19:00的发言：

如何判断瓶装水是sanitary condition improved ？也可能他就是本地造地，也有问题。

CR 最忌讳把自己的主观臆断作为推理证据。。。。

dennyhuang

那yaoyao觉得除了瓶装水有点离谱，我的推理是不是有一些道理呢?

yaoyao99

I was just copying his answer over, not saying I agree with it.

Original statement: cleaner plants => lower # of patients with disease A

A. Plants are newly built (irrelevant)

B. Sick people drink the same amount of bottled water as healthy people (irrelevant)

C. Better medical techniques => correctly identified patients => less patients incorrectly diagonsed with A => lower # of patients with disease A (weakens the original statement)

D. Patients with disease A is less likely to get worse (irrelevant)

E. Incomplete sentence?

dennyhuang

跳出来考虑可能会思维就开阔了，我了解了，谢谢yaoyao！

题目本身说的是improved sanitary conditions at water-treatment plants, 而B却说Bottled spring water ，有什么关系呢？没什么关系其实。

huyannancy

Actually, I think B is strength the argument since it rule out another explanation that maybe different quantities of bottled water consumed by both thoes who caught the disease and those who did not cause the reduced number of diagnosed disease.

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-10-20 23:26:51编辑过]