Another LSAT question for help

Elen

Vegetable, in the proper combinations, can provide all of the nutrients necessary for human life. A mixture of whole grains and legumes, for instance, contains protein of a quality at least as high as that of animal protein, and the major vitamin and mineral groups can easily be represented in an all-vegetable diet. What is more, a little culinary imagination can make a vegetarian feast as varied and interesting as any meal basased around meat. Given these facts, it is certainly time that we outlaw the raising and slaughtering of domestic livestock and turn to the wider cultivation of high-nutrition crops.


Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the rasoning in the argument?


A.The author does not provide a full definition of the terms used in the argument.


B.The author bases the conclusion on an inappropriate analogy.


C. The author concludes that a change is desirable based solely on evidence that it is feasible.


D. The author does not demonstrate that attaining a wider cultivation of high-nutrition crops is possible.


E.The argument assumes what it seeks to establish.

weiyu

D. is it right?


蔬菜组合有和meat一样的蛋白质，蔬菜有维他命，蔬菜容易作出花样--> 放弃养禽，种cultivation of high-nutrition crops. D指出了其中一个错误

snow_mountain

我觉得C好像好一点呀？

weiyu

快来讨论

snow_mountain

以下是引用Elen在2004-3-24 11:53:00的发言：
Vegetable, in the proper combinations, can provide all of the nutrients necessary for human life. A mixture of whole grains and legumes, for instance, contains protein of a quality at least as high as that of animal protein, and the major vitamin and mineral groups can easily be represented in an all-vegetable diet. What is more, a little culinary imagination can make a vegetarian feast as varied and interesting as any meal basased around meat. Given these facts, it is certainly time that we outlaw the raising and slaughtering of domestic livestock and turn to the wider cultivation of high-nutrition crops.

我是这样理解的：蔬菜能够提供所有的营养。而且又能做的跟肉一样varied and interesting. 所以应该outlaw the raising and slaughtering.....

就因为能够replace 就应该replace 吗？好像没道理呀？

这里应该不涉及到wider cultivation of high-nutrition crops 吧？反正目前的蔬菜只要properly combined 就能够提供跟肉一样的营养。

其实自己也不肯定。open to further discussion.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the rasoning in the argument?

A.The author does not provide a full definition of the terms used in the argument.

B.The author bases the conclusion on an inappropriate analogy.

C. The author concludes that a change is desirable based solely on evidence that it is feasible.

D. The author does not demonstrate that attaining a wider cultivation of high-nutrition crops is possible.

E.The argument assumes what it seeks to establish.

Elen

Actually, I'm confused between C and E, and wish NN show me how to get to the right path.

lawyer_1

应选C



1.原文推理为:VEGETABLE可以代替MEAT-----所以,应该代替MEAT


    选项C为:因为它是可行的(FEASIBLE),所以值得(DESIRABLE: WORTH DOING)代替(CHANG)


2.E错. 感觉上不存在循环论证(循环论证是说来说去都很绕)


3.D易混,但我认为D为无关项(OUT OF SCOPE).题干的ISSUE是"是否应该代替"的问题.而D选项是关于可能性问题.

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-3-26 20:59:54编辑过]

mariezhu

我觉得C更好，虽然蔬菜有一应优点，但是有优点不一定可实施。

wwwweng

d是无关选项，自然应该排除掉