关于OG11th上几道看似削弱前提的疑问

a_tian1988

看了很多帖子都说削弱题“只能削弱结论和推理过程”，但是在整理OG11th时发现几道题看上去就是削弱前提。为什么？是不是我的思路出现了什么问题？

例如：

OG11th-18: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm others as a result of taking the risks.As a result, they concluded that it should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.

答案是B：Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts

我的推理思路：not harm the others ---> they can decide whether or not to wear a seat

og11th-23. With the emergence of biotechnology companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary results on their in-house researchers and their academic consultants. This constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering.
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?

正确答案(D) To enhance the companies’ standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important.

我的推理思路：biotechnology companies keep silent about proprietary results --> slow the development of biological scientce and engineering

overthere33

只能削弱结论和推理过程???

否认前提的合理性显然是一种削弱方式

a_tian1988

我上XDF的时候老师说的，而且我在哪里的帖子上也看到过这样的说法，说不能质疑前提。

对于以上问题XDF老师的回答是：“你削弱的都是假定，不是前提。你的问题是前提和假定分不清楚，在中文举一反三思路里你过的很好，可是对GMAT的要求，你想的太跳跃！”

请大家指正怎样分清假定和前提？

还有一题OG11th-64:Red blood cells in which the malarial-fever parasite resides are eliminated from a person's body after 120 days. Because the parasite cannot travel to a new generation of red blood cells, any fever that develops in a person more than 120 days after that person has moved to a malaria-free region is not due to the malarial parasite.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion above?

(A)          The fever caused by the malarial parasite may resemble the fever caused by flu viruses.

(B)          The anopheles mosquito, which is the principal insect carrier of the malarial parasite, has been eradicated in many parts of the world.

(C)         Many malarial symptoms other than the fever, which can be suppressed with antimalarial medication, can reappear within 120 days after the medication is discontinued.

(D)         In some cases, the parasite that causes malarial fever travels to cells of the spleen, which are less frequently eliminated from a person's body than are red blood cells.

(E)          In any region infested with malaria-carrying mosquitoes, there are individuals who appear to be immune to malaria.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion above?

(A)          The fever caused by the malarial parasite may resemble the fever caused by flu viruses.

(B)          The anopheles mosquito, which is the principal insect carrier of the malarial parasite, has been eradicated in many parts of the world.

(C)         Many malarial symptoms other than the fever, which can be suppressed with antimalarial medication, can reappear within 120 days after the medication is discontinued.

(D)         In some cases, the parasite that causes malarial fever travels to cells of the spleen, which are less frequently eliminated from a person's body than are red blood cells.

(E)          In any region infested with malaria-carrying mosquitoes, there are individuals who appear to be immune to malaria.

推理思路：前提:老的感染了malarial-fever parasit的红细胞120天后都会死去&parasit不能到新一代的红细胞中 --> 结论：120天后发烧都不是因为malarial parasit 
正确答案D:我认为是“提出他因”

但是，XDF老师说：“此题为攻击假定，假定：只能存活在红血球细胞中”

望牛人指点~~~

 

[此贴子已经被作者于2009/9/11 17:07:27编辑过]

skyzhang

我来说说前提的问题。

你只有叙述一个事实，由此推论到结果。这个事实才能被称为前提。

1，这个叙述的事实是什么，一群人说：因为只要不伤害别人，人有权利干任何事情。所以可以不用安全带。

黄色部分是前提。A选项说的是，实际上你伤害了别人。LZ再看看，有削弱前提吗？

2，因为公司出现了，人们害怕这些公司would干坏事，阻挠好事情。

这个前提并不是人们害怕这些公司将会干坏事，而是”这些公司出现了，他们要壮大。“

注意，it was feared that they would ......  and in turn, would .......

that 引导的这两个句子就是题目问的prediction。

skyzhang

红血球那个我觉得你说的是对的。

a_tian1988

以下是引用skyzhang在2009/9/11 17:30:00的发言：

我来说说前提的问题。

你只有叙述一个事实，由此推论到结果。这个事实才能被称为前提。

1，这个叙述的事实是什么，一群人说：因为只要不伤害别人，人有权利干任何事情。所以可以不用安全带。

黄色部分是前提。A选项说的是，实际上你伤害了别人。LZ再看看，有削弱前提吗？

2，因为公司出现了，人们害怕这些公司would干坏事，阻挠好事情。

这个前提并不是人们害怕这些公司将会干坏事，而是”这些公司出现了，他们要壮大。“

注意，it was feared that they would ......  and in turn, would .......

that 引导的这两个句子就是题目问的prediction。

谢谢指教，那么og11th-18,推理思路应该为：前提：因为只要不伤害别人，人有权利干任何事情-->(假定：不带安全带不会伤害到别人）-->人们又权利不带安全带。因此A选项削弱了假定，对吗？

og11th-64:前提：老的malarial-fever parasite红细胞120后死去，p不能到新一代的红细胞中-->（假定：malarial-fever parasite只会呆在红细胞中）-->120后发烧都不是因为malarial parasite。正确选项D,因此也是削弱假定？

按照此上文中的思路，那么og11th-23原文中既然都是prediction,那它的结论和前提是什么呢？请赐教该题的逻辑链，谢谢！

skyzhang

我觉得你这种A推B推C得方法实在是太绕了。在考场上完全不现实，而且不是做题的思路，是知道答案然后进行分析的思路。

1，我觉得考虑主要还是要考虑是不是可以从已知条件jump to结论。
你非要这么分析，我觉得逻辑上应该是对的。

2，你可以说是他因，你也可以说是削弱假设啊。因为你的这个他因，本来也就是不同于他的假定嘛，也就是削弱了假定啊。

3，predictions就是结论。

（因为）公司壮大。这个就是前提。你不能在答案中选择削弱这个的。