对狒狒的题目有点不知所以然了

miraere

There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published. There is a system in place for the confirmation or disconfirmation of scientific findings, namely, the replication of results by other scientists. Poor scientific work on the part of any one scientists, which can include anything from careless reporting practices to fraud, is not harmful. It will be exposed and rendered harmless when other scientists conduct experiments and obtain disconfirmatory results.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument?

(A) Scientific experiments can go unchallenged for many years before they are replicated.

(B) Most scientists work in universities, where their work is submitted to peer review before publication.

(C) Most scientists are under pressure to make their work accessible to the scrutiny of replication.

(D) In scientific experiments, careless reporting is more common than fraud.

(E) Most scientists work as part of a team rather than alone.

为什么选A？。。。

Justin12122

Premise 1：当其他科学家验证并修正此poor work，则它就不会harmful.
sub-conclusion:poor scientific work is not harmful.

premise 2: confirmation系统可以验证work of scientists

main conclusion：没有必要由这样一个系统。

A:说go unchallenged for many years也就是说work可以harmful for many years..weaken了sub-conclusion，进而削弱了main conclusion

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-7-12 13:44:47编辑过]