请教一道GWD逻辑

grape262001

In each of the past five years, Barraland’s prison population has increased.  Yet, according to official government statistics, for none of those years has there been either an increase in the number of criminal cases brought to trial, or an increase in the rate at which convictions have been obtained.  Clearly, therefore, the percentage of people convicted of crimes who are being given prison sentences is on the increase.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?   

 

 

1. In Barraland the range of punishments that can be imposed instead of a prison sentence is wide.

2. Over the last ten years, overcrowding in the prisons of Barraland has essentially been eliminated as a result of an ambitious program of prison construction.

3. Ten years ago, Barraland reformed its criminal justice system, imposing longer minimum sentences for those crimes for which a prison sentence had long been mandatory.

4. Barraland has been supervising convicts on parole more closely in recent years, with the result that parole violations have become significantly less frequent.

5. The number of people in Barraland who feel that crime is on the increase is significantly greater now than it was five years ago.

各位兄弟姐妹可否赐教，这道题GWD上的答案是C，可怎么看觉得不像啊，为什么扯到10年前了啊

Press Secretary:  Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.  They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts.  But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors.  So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?       E

1. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.

2. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.

3. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.

4. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.

5. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

这道题我也想请问一下，我觉得应该选E啊，可为什么答案给的是B呢！

跪求解释啊！

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-8-6 10:39:12编辑过]

yi11

第一题
监狱人数上升，但是最近五年每年刑事案件上庭数量没有增加，上庭以后定罪率也没有增加（注意定罪不一定坐牢）。结论是那么被定罪去坐牢罪犯的比例一定增加了。
假设每年上庭数量是a，定罪率b，定罪坐牢率c，那么题目的条件就是a*b是定值，c<b而且c增加，所以a*c增加，由此导致就是增加的被叛坐牢的人导致监狱人数上升。
但是注意监狱人数好像我们小学做过的数学题一个水龙头进水一个水龙头出，光考虑进监狱的人不考虑放出来的人是不一定能推理总人数变化。
问weaken
(C)说十年前坐牢的人的最短刑期被增加了，那么就是说有一些罪犯在监狱里呆的更长了，结果没有及时的被放出来，这样即使新抓进来的的人不变，总人数还是会增加。
这个选项更关键实在最短刑期被增加而不是10年前，换成9年前8年前一样weaken文章结论。
考试的时候这道题应该不难选，因为结论只和监狱人数有关，能看出来水龙头原理的话只有这个最短星期能对监狱人数有影响。A（其他惩罚手段）、B（监狱太挤，人多并不necessary导致挤，因为没有提及监狱capacity）、D（保释）、E（B的人数）都是无关很容易排除。

第二题
总统取消的90%高速公路项目都是反对党的辖区，所以有人说总统公报私仇，但是被取消的项目都是无党派人士报告出来的废物项目，所以总统小秘说总统根本没有门户之见，只是一心为了建设和谐社会。
问assumption。
(E)和总统一伙儿正好相反，如果反对党一般不认为无党派人士的报告是公正的，那不正好说明总统用不公正的标准判断该取消哪个项目。和结论相反。
(B)利用+Not变weaken比较好理解，如果报告里面豆腐渣工程大都是总统罩的，那么总统要是一视同仁的话，就应该都取消，这样被取消的项目>50%应该是总统的关系。而文章说90%都是反对党的，说明总统肯定是下了黑手，打着反对豆腐渣工程的口号光取消别人的豆腐渣不取消自己的豆腐渣。
结论是两党比较(A)(C)没有两党比较直接排除，D无关概念(expensive)也排除。

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-8-6 12:16:01编辑过]

grape262001

解释的真的很详细啊！好厉害！非常感谢！

lijiaxuan810823

第一题：监狱人数想关于两个因素：每年关进去的人和罪犯在监狱里呆的时间的长短。题目说，监狱人数增长，但是上庭和定罪的人没有增加，所以被定罪去坐牢的人增加了。这里只涉及到关进去的人，所以要找一个和呆的时间长短的东西来进行削弱或者加强。C的十年前只是一个标志，并非和现在相比较或者相混淆，只是为了说明关进去的人呆的时间长了，正好削弱，他因削弱，不一定是关进去的人每年增加了，可以减少，但是总有人关进去，而且时间长不放出来，所以总的监狱人数增加了就。

第二题：假设题，not+weaken。B去掉not，意思是被认为浪费的取消的工程属于总统帮，而原文意思是通过取消这些报复反对党，所以方向相反，削弱，not+削弱则为必要条件，即假设，所以正确。