OG（诊断）-20

slamshady

20. In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was 10 years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?

(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.

这道题答案是C，我选了B，OG的解释说由于sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions ，人们就会用的多，造成更多事故。。。但这不一定会导致使用的增多啊，总觉得这个答案写得很含糊。。。难道是我的思维有问题？

labellor

the points is '' than wooden sleds can'', which could be infered that the plastic sleds are used in much more conditions (so as to be used in dangerous conditions).

slamshady

the points is '' than wooden sleds can'', which could be infered that the plastic sleds are used in much more conditions (so as to be used in dangerous conditions).

-- by 会员 labellor (2010/4/5 11:18:47)

谢谢 有点明白了 我当初在看这个选项的时候觉得它只是在比较两种sleds的功能，当做无关选项排除了，根本不会去想到这一点，而且很多题目都有这种现象，请问我这是不是思路不对啊。。。有什么办法可以纠正过来吗？

linshigong

我认为lz的思路确实有一些问题。

作逻辑重要的是找出文章的立论和结论，然后攻击他的论证。

这道题说的是
因为受伤的小孩更多了（原因）----〉plastic sleds are more dangerous （结果）

那如果说使用plastic sleds 的人更多了，受伤的rate则可能不变或更小，那文章的结论就被weaken了。


B选项说小孩都不使用护具是一个无关推论，原文没有提到。


--------------------------
lz，纠正的办法就是强迫自己分析每道题的原因和结果。

培养自己在读完题目后就能分析出来，然后再看选项就轻松很多了

slamshady

我认为lz的思路确实有一些问题。

作逻辑重要的是找出文章的立论和结论，然后攻击他的论证。

这道题说的是
因为受伤的小孩更多了（原因）----〉plastic sleds are more dangerous （结果）

那如果说使用plastic sleds 的人更多了，受伤的rate则可能不变或更小，那文章的结论就被weaken了。


B选项说小孩都不使用护具是一个无关推论，原文没有提到。


--------------------------
lz，纠正的办法就是强迫自己分析每道题的原因和结果。

培养自己在读完题目后就能分析出来，然后再看选项就轻松很多了

-- by 会员 linshigong (2010/4/5 13:09:14)

谢谢！我现在就是看题目的时候知道哪里会出问题。。。但可能是因为太喜欢抠错误。。。有时候会看好选项觉得5个都是错的。。。然后看了解释还是觉得这个答案有问题，就比如这道题

还有。。。纠正一下，照OG的解释，这道题的削弱思路是给出他因，塑料sled的适用范围广导致使用频率增加，是频率增加而不是塑料sled本身的问题导致了事故的增加。。。所以我分析下来他这个答案有假定的成分在里面

还有比如这道题：
18. Vasquez-Morrell Assurance specializes in insuring manufacturers. Whenever a policyholder makes a claim, a claims
adjuster determines the amount that Vasquez-Morrell is obligated to pay. Vasquez-Morrell is cutting its staff of claims
adjusters by 15 percent. To ensure that the company’s ability to handle claims promptly is affected as little as possible by
the staff cuts, consultants recommend that Vasquez-Morrell lay off those adjusters who now take longest, on average, to
complete work on claims assigned to them.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the consultants’ criterion for selecting the staff to be
laid off?
(A) If the time that Vasquez-Morrell takes to settle claims increases significantly, it could lose business to other insurers.
(B) Supervisors at Vasquez-Morrell tend to assign the most complex claims to the most capable adjusters.
(C) At Vasquez-Morrell, no insurance payments are made until a claims adjuster has reached a final determination on
the claim.
(D) There are no positions at Vasquez-Morrell to which staff currently employed as claims adjusters could be reassigned.
(E) The premiums that Vasquez-Morrell currently charges are no higher than those charged for similar coverage by
competitors.

答案是B，但好像他也是假定越complex,花的时间越长，即那些花时间长的应付的是最complex的，觉得这种讲法或多或少有些牵强

所以几遍OG看下来，我发现有些东西对出题者来说就是常识，不用说也一定是这样的，而对我来说其之间的关系要说清楚，大概这就是所谓的思路不一致吧。。。NN的看法呢？

linshigong

确实有这种情况，像保险阿，汽车阿，印第安人，女权，这种中国人接触不多的东西，在GMAT里面出现特别多。。。。

但这毕竟是美国人出的考试，而且参加考试的也大部分都是美国人。。。


逻辑这种东西，如果A能推出B，B能推出C，那么A就能推出C。
过于拘泥其中的道理是没有意义的。

slamshady

确实有这种情况，像保险阿，汽车阿，印第安人，女权，这种中国人接触不多的东西，在GMAT里面出现特别多。。。。

但这毕竟是美国人出的考试，而且参加考试的也大部分都是美国人。。。


逻辑这种东西，如果A能推出B，B能推出C，那么A就能推出C。
过于拘泥其中的道理是没有意义的。

-- by 会员 linshigong (2010/4/5 23:22:36)

恩。。。这种靠感觉做的的东西只能慢慢去悟了，尽可能适应他的出题思路