我是把这个argument套用到logic的frame work里面: Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the explanation given in the argument? The explanation is "the severe pollution of the North Sea waters must have weakened the immune system of the seals so that they could no longer withstand the virus" (这里称为explanation,但这个statement在这个argument里充当的是conclusion的角色) 选项A,可以看成是对"the pollution of the North Sea"的一种证实,尽管这个证实不是100%的(i.e. the question used "support", not "justify")。 实际上这个选项addressed an assumption/logic gap: Premise 1:A distemper virus has caused two-thirds of the seal population in the North Sea to die since May 1988 Premise 2: the normally latent virus could prevail so suddenly Conclusion: the severe pollution of the North Sea waters must have weakened the immune system of the seals so that they could no longer withstand the virus Missing Premise/Assumption: there has been an increase in the severity of the pollution in North Sea lately |