CR OG11-23

sameoldstory

23. With the emergence of biotechnology companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary results on their in-house researchers and their academic consultants. This constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering.
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?

(A) Biotechnological research funded by industry has reached some conclusions that are of major scientific importance.

(B) When the results of scientific research are kept secret, independent researchers are unable to build on those results.

(C) Since the research priorities of biotechnology companies are not the same as those of academic insititutions, the financial support of research by such companies distorts the research agenda.

(D) To enhance the companies’ standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important.

(E) Biotechnology companies devote some of their research resources to problems that are of fundamental scientific importance and that are not expected to produce immediate practical applications

正确答案是D,可是我觉得B也对啊,如果保密不能继续研究的话那就不得不公开了啊, OG的解释上就简简单单一句不是WEAKEN就好了

telering

题目要求weaken “the prediction of scientific secrecy", 而B"when the results..are kept secret", 已经承认了所要weaken 的对象。当然就没作用了。

songqi

我觉得，答案中的事物必须与原文有关才行，或者，必须是原文中提到的。

B选项的主体是independent researchers，原文未提及，因为原文一直在说biotechnology companies。因此independent researchers怎么样并不能对原文结论构成削弱。

D选项说明了publish their results对biotechnology companies有切身的利益，因此削弱了原文的结论。

jtcoffeebean

前提：有人害怕生物工艺公司会让科学家们对发明保持沉默-〉结论：此举会减慢生物学发展

D选项直接反对了前提，更切合原意

不管B怎样有他削弱的理由，选most seriously weaken的

roguehsl

我这里同意楼上的解释.其实在削弱题型中,存在它因削弱等,因此,不能简单的说"independent researchers"不是题目中所提而排除此项.

另外,我想确认的是,在削弱题中,可以直接否认前提而达到削弱的效果吗?

对于B选项,原文中说"保密,影响发展",B说:不公开,独立的研究者就不能对结论有建树.这恰恰是加强,而不是削弱.

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-9-14 11:32:26编辑过]