【求助】7月逻辑机经第9题

icewaternala

    

 说 Lead 是存在于gasoline emmission 中而通常会堆积在railroad旁的土. 从一些1970~1980 间有大车流量的路上能发现到旁边的土有Lead堆积．所以当科学家发现某段路段的土旁有Lead 堆积 mostly
likely 这路段在1980前有大量车流. 问这个statement 犯了什么问题 (这啥? 从来没看过CR有这样考的):    选项有A)把一个reason for
one situation applies to another situation.. (大概就是不管其它原因把曾经发生过的一种现象的原因apply to another 现象regardless other factors)

  选项B) or C)
generalize a factor attibuted to certain cause of a situation to another
situation with the same cause. (以偏盖全的样子)。其中印象最深的是 D) 倒果为因(这段英文可饶舌了,中文还是威阿) 反正我选了A... 但是V太烂我也不好发言, 感觉GMAC储存了六月到7/17(我到死都会记住这天...TMD害我从7/1一直期待到7/15. 直到看到7/16都还是旧题我整个就绝得一定是20+后换..好傻好天真阿..) 的能量整个改过考题型态. 像这种类型的题考了两个.

这一题真的选A么？为什么？我觉得选以偏概全。。。求教NN们

kykosd

感觉像是 本来要从a推b，但现在变为b推a，觉得d比较好

mm007_mmgmat

严重同意楼上的！

我也觉得选D

INCHASEDREAM

同意楼上的说法，

rosemaryyan

up!!

ly1st

我觉得应该是因果倒置呢，原文简单的取了一个逆命题~~

mm007_mmgmat

dui a

我也觉得是因果倒置，那不是D么？

wittyhunter

首先分析一下原题，（assumption：JJ作者在复述jj时是100%正确的）：说 Lead 是存在于gasoline emmission 中而通常会堆积在railroad旁的土. 从一些1970~1980 间有大车流量的路上能发现到旁边的土有Lead堆积．所以当科学家发现某段路段的土旁有Lead 堆积 mostly likely 这路段在1980前有大量车流. 问这个statement 犯了什么问题

文中说了关于1970~1980 间公路上的两个事件，A:有大车流量；B：路旁土中有lead堆积。如果原题明确说明，A是B的充分原因的话，那作者的错误就是因果倒置了，楼主的答案D应该没问题。但是如果只用“能发现”来连接A，B，说明A，B只是同时发生的两件事，作者犯得错误就是混淆因果，具体文献如下：

Confusing Cause and Effect is a fallacy that has the following general form:

1. A and B regularly occur together.
2. Therefore A is the cause of B.

This fallacy is committed when a person assumes that one event must cause another just because the events occur together. More formally, this fallacy involves drawing the conclusion that A is the cause of B simply because A and B are in regular conjunction (and there is not a common cause that is actually the cause of A and B). The mistake being made is that the causal conclusion is being drawn without adequate justification.

不知分析的对不对，还请大家多讨论。总之，我认为答案应该跟因果有关，同学们还是要到考场上见题后自己分析。

3. Therefore A is the cause of B.

This fallacy is committed when a person assumes that one event must cause another just because the events occur together. More formally, this fallacy involves drawing the conclusion that A is the cause of B simply because A and B are in regular conjunction (and there is not a common cause that is actually the cause of A and B). The mistake being made is that the causal conclusion is being drawn without adequate justification.

不知分析的对不对，还请大家多讨论。总之，我认为答案应该跟因果有关，同学们还是要到考场上见题后自己分析。

icewaternala

？

msuzengli

给这三种错误举些例子:

A:  把一个reason for one situation applies to another situation, (大概就是不管其它原因把曾经发生过的一种现象的原因apply to another 现象regardless other factors)

设Situation 1为去饭堂吃饭, Situation 2为去情侣常去的高级餐厅吃饭
大胖去饭堂吃饭是因为饿了, 所以他去情侣常去的高级餐厅吃饭也一定是因为饿了;

B or C: generalize a factor attibuted to certain cause of a situation to another situation with the same cause.

设cause为手上一个项目很重要, 压力大, situation 1为睡不好, situation 2为吃不香, factor为时间紧 -
因为手上一个项目很重要, 我压力很大, 所以在没有充裕时间午休的时候, 我午觉会睡得浅; 没心情品尝饭菜的原因是压力大, 所以时间紧也一定是我吃饭不香的一个因素;

D:倒果为因
果: 喝水, 因: 口渴 -

因为要喝水, 所以我必须口渴.

综合以上, 我认为A是最恰当的.