提供一道充分必要条件的好题

weiyu

    

L2001/10-4-21提供一道充分必要条件的好题fficeffice" />

21.Political scientist: As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom. There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies. Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects.

The reasoning in the political scientist’s argument is flawed because it

(A) confuses the conditions necessary for political freedom with the conditions sufficient to bring it about

(B) fail to consider that a substantial increase in the level of political freedom might cause a society to become more democratic

(C) appeals to historical examples that are irrelevant to the causal claim being made

(D) overlooks the possibility that democracy promotes political freedom without being necessary or sufficient by itself to produce it（D）

(E) bases its historical case on a personal point of view

    

Answer is D; 请考虑一下为何A不对?

paopao

weiyu,我糊涂了。能讲讲吗？谢谢。

ecsniffer

My explanation:



First, analysize the passage as belowing:


As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom(conclusion). There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom). Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).


By citing the counter-evidences that suggest democracy doesn't sufficiently or nessarily promote political freedom, the arguer draws the conclusion that democracy does not promote political freedom.    The arguer commits the fallacy of "Hasty Generalization" because he ignores some other evidences    which support the opinion that democracy does promote political freedom.


So, answer D.


A is inconsistent with the reasoning of the argument.


For further dissusion!

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-3-7 11:06:57编辑过]

paopao

ecsniffer , sorry , i am still confused.



There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies--->(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom).


I share the same opinion with u .


But , how can u refer to the following? I don't know how can u get the boldface part .


    Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects-->(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).


Thank u for your help.

weiyu

ecsniffer is right. the necessary condition means that the conclusion cannot turn out without the premise. For this question, because despotisms and oligarchies can bring the freedom without democracy, therefore democracy is not a necessary condition; from the first sentence, you can reach a conclusion that democracy is not sufficient condition for freedom

ecsniffer

yeah,paopao


The sentence that democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom (译成中文就是促成政治自由，民主并不是必要条件)means that some other things may promote political freedom, such as despotisms and oligarchies

paopao

以下是引用weiyu在2004-3-7 14:50:00的发言：
ecsniffer is right. the necessary condition means that the conclusion cannot turn out without the premise. For this question, because despotisms and oligarchies can bring the freedom without democracy, therefore democracy is not a necessary condition; from the first sentence, you can reach a conclusion that democracy is not sufficient condition for freedom

weiyu,ecsniffer , i got it now. Thank you for your kind response.


Thesed days, i tried to distinguish between     the necessary condition and the sufficient condition, the basis of logic. However, I still cannot straight it out.


More questions and suggestions about sufficient    conditions and necessary conditions are highly appreciated.


Thank u .    



    

paopao

BTW, if possible, can u provide the link which might help to differ the sufficent conditions and necessary conditions in logic?


I am keen to solve my problem.Thanks.

happycg

dddddddddddddddddddddddddd

beichenxuans

以下是引用ecsniffer在2004/3/7 11:02:00的发言：
My explanation:

First, analysize the passage as belowing:
As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom(conclusion). There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies(democracy doesn't sufficiently promote political freedom). Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects(democracy doesn't necessarily promote political freedom).
By citing the counter-evidences that suggest democracy doesn't sufficiently or nessarily promote political freedom, the arguer draws the conclusion that democracy does not promote political freedom. The arguer commits the fallacy of "Hasty Generalization" because he ignores some other evidences which support the opinion that democracy does promote political freedom.
So, answer D.
A is inconsistent with the reasoning of the argument.
For further dissusion!

神贴 挖坟