一道逻辑题请教[求助]

amo

15(p67-13). The recent decline in the value of the dollar was triggered by a prediction of slower economic growth in the coming year. But that prediction would not have adversely affected the dollar had it not been for the government's huge budget deficit, which must therefore be decreased to prevent future currency declines.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion about how to prevent future currency declines?
(A) The government has made little attempt to reduce the budget deficit.
(B) The budget deficit has not caused a slowdown in economic growth.
(C) The value of the dollar declined several times in the year prior to the recent prediction of slower economic growth.
(D) Before there was a large budget deficit, predictions of slower economic growth frequently caused declines in the dollar's value.
(E) When there is a large budget deficit, other events in addition to predictions of
slower economic growth sometimes trigger declines in currency value.
请问这题的逻辑结构是怎样的？是前提推结论还是因果关系？又如何来解答呢？谢谢

番茄炒蛋

答案是c吧
找出他因削弱，所以原文给出的理由就不成立咯
下次还是把答案写出来吧，新来的小兄弟，呵呵

amo

答案是D，不过我觉得C也有道理

番茄炒蛋

我觉得还是c
bronoy你再来看看吧，确认一下
我真的是糊涂了？

cranberry

文章意思是：如果不是因为巨大的财政赤字，增长缓慢的预估一般不会对美圆造成不好的影响。
否定它只要说明，没有财政赤字，也能造成美圆贬值。

只有D

cranberry

C的意思是，在预估增长缓慢之前的一年，美圆就几次贬值。只能说明没有预期，也会贬值。非A会导致B，不一定说明A就不能导致B。

halcyon

前提： 美圆贬值
结论： 政府赤子

结论解释 前提

答案d： 没有赤子， 美圆依然贬值， 属于“无因有果” 削弱。

番茄炒蛋

呵呵，搞清楚了，开始有一个从句没有仔细看透。谢谢大家咯
又有进步了，开心
关键时候还是要cranberry出手啊，呵呵，佩服

amo

多谢大家帮我解答，现在茅塞顿开了

Julianna

如果D成立, 就能推导出与题目中结论相反的结论, 因此D答案weaken了原题结论.
题目中的推论建立在budget dificit---->future currency decline的基础上,
因此要weaken结论的话,只有从原因budget dificit入手.