22. It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause. Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage? (A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital. (B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect. (C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power. (D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones. (E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate！ 这个题目总是不理解，不知道原文及其5个选项的logic error 到底是什么？甚至原文的意思都不甚逻辑， 那位大侠能不能帮助翻译一下原文，并且指出各个句子的逻辑错误。谢谢
22. It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.
题目分析如下：作者认为“It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. ”这个事实不正确的。 也就是说作者认为 It is logical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. 翻成中文：作者认为可以由事情的一个结果推断出其他结果。而选项A就犯了同样的错误。
An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. 这个是观察到的结果。 I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital. 这个是推出的结果。
A选项从观察到的结果推出另外一个结果，是不符合逻辑的。 关键是 This is incorrect 中的This，指的是前面整句话都是错的。
tony9721 发表于 2003-5-5 01:19
22. It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one p ...
22. It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause. 思路：认为从一个只能产生一个结果的原因中，推测出来第二个不同的结果，是错误的！ 因为这个第二个结果必须来自于这个原因的其他方面，而不是来自于导致已经发生的结果的那个原因。
Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage?
(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital. “匿名者捐钱”（第一结果）是一个已经产生的结果，我们可以推测出来这个人热衷“慈善事业”（原因）。然后再用这个原因推测出来他在一家儿童医院从事志愿者活动（第二结果）。这正好符合题干中指出的logic error. 因为由一个相同的原因，推出来了两个不同的结果：一个是捐款，一个是志愿活动。
(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect.
(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power.
(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones.（A）
(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate. 逻辑错误在于“部分”不能代表“全部”，不同于题干
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2003-5-5 01:19:00
