求教高手：LSAT-4-3-11

caterpillar

11. Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical found in minute quantities in most drinking water had an adverse effect on the human nervous system. Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible because there was no neural mechanism for bringing it about. Several papers by well-known scientists in the field followed, unanimously purporting to prove Professor Smith wrong. This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smith's work and conspired to discredit it.

Which one of the following is the central flaw in the argument given by the author of the passage?

(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smith's discovery have found general acceptance.

(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.

(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.

(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.

(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smith's paper had on the public's confidence in the safety of most drinking water.

答案是C。可我不明白为什么要选取C。

番茄炒蛋

原文有一个Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible
那么另外三个科学家很可能就是因为这个Existing scientific theory就得出结论说是smith是错的
而如果是这样的话就陷入了一个循环论证，是没有说服力的

不要请教高手了，大家都是一起学习的，有问题就来讨论啦

深海的小美人鱼

炒0真是谦虚啊

wanze

(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
这句话是啥意思？

番茄炒蛋

这个作者没有解释当科学家们在说明这个问题的时候为什么没有提供有说服力的证据

这是大意吧，你就凑合着看吧，呵呵

caterpillar

怎么还是觉得有点别扭呢？本题的结论是：This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smith's work and conspired to discredit it.
似乎只是说明SMITH的理论与传统理论相悖，并不是说明谁对谁错，因此“提供有说服力的证据”也应该不是必需的。

番茄炒蛋

我觉得这题的问题出在
Several papers by well-known scientists in the field followed, unanimously purporting to prove Professor Smith wrong
因为在这之前有一个这样的前提Existing scientific theory held that no such effect 。。。
所以依照这个逻辑得出的结论是很可疑的

文中的最后一句，也就是 caterpillar  分析的那一句没有什么问题啊，题眼应该不在那吧

flora_wang

这很清楚的说明了科学理论受到了smith工作的威胁,所以(科学家们)就合谋串通(用自己的权威性)来证明smith不能相信......

caterpillar

炒蛋，不好意思，几天没来逻辑区，没有看到你的回贴。
我还是没想通。我们来分析一下：
这道题的前题是：
１、Smith提出了一个新理论，这个理论与以前的理论相悖；
２、该领域的著名科学家们都纷纷发表论文，一致认为Smith的理论是错误的；
结论是：
This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smith's work and conspired to discredit it.
这清楚地显示出：Smith的研究威胁到（过去的）科学理论成就，因此他们联合起来置疑他。

因此我觉得，要说明这段推理有问题，就要说明根据前题１、２不能推导出结论。
我不知道Ｃ为什么就说明其中有问题？

Factiva

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-1-22 14:18:32编辑过]