- UID
- 887486
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2013-5-16
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
找到曼哈顿上一个很棒的解题思路：
Question #121 in the Official Guide Critical Reasoning Section:
The spacing of the four holes on a fragment of a bone flute excavated at a Neanderthal campsite is just what is required to play the third through sixth notes of the diatonic scale” the seven-note musical scale used in much of Western music since the Renaissance. Musicologists therefore hypothesize that the diatonic musical scale was developed and used thousands of years before it was adopted by Western musicians.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the hypothesis?
Now that I have my Musicologist hat on, I find the hypothesis that I am supposed to defend: the diatonic music scale was developed and used thousand of years before it was adopted by Western musicians. So far, my evidence is that a bone flute at a Neanderthal campsite was discovered. That’s a pretty weak link between a bone flute and a diatonic music scale being developed. The other important part about the flute is that the four holes on this flute is just what is required to play the third through sixth notes of the seven-note diatonic scale.
Now before I even look at the answer choices, I play a little Good Musicologist, Bad Musicologist. Since I’m trying to support this hypothesis, I’m the Good Musicologist, but I’m also imagining what the Bad Musicologist is going to say: the diatonic scale was first adopted by Western musicians during the Renaissance. What arguments might the Bad Musicologist come up with? Maybe that the bone wasn’t used for music but for some other purpose. Maybe they would show the logic gap between some holes on a flute and the development of a full diatonic scale. The Bad Musicologist would have to take the extreme stance that no one had developed the diatonic scale before the Western musicians of the Renaissance era. So if I, the Good Musicologist, can find anything that would refute this, I’ve strengthened my hypothesis.
With this mindset, I can look at the answer choices in two, equally valid ways. First off, which of the five answer choices would best strengthen my argument? Time travelers have gone back in time and watched Neanderthals play the bone flute on a full diatonic scale. This would be a great way to strengthen the argument, but it also is true because if the opposite of it were true” time travelers have gone back in time and watched Neanderthals use the bone for some other purpose or to play only two notes with the flute” it would provide helpful information for the Bad Musicologist. Whenever I get stuck on a strengthen problem, I play Good Cop looking for what would strengthen the argument and Bad Cop looking for what, if the opposite were true, would weaken the argument. Let’s try it out with the answer choices:
The spacing of the four holes on a fragment of a bone flute excavated at a Neanderthal campsite is just what is required to play the third through sixth notes of the diatonic scale” the seven-note musical scale used in much of Western music since the Renaissance. Musicologists therefore hypothesize that the diatonic musical scale was developed and used thousands of years before it was adopted by Western musicians.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the hypothesis?
(A) Bone flutes were probably the only musical instrument made by Neanderthals.
(B) No musical instrument that is known to have used a diatonic scale is of an earlier date than the flute found at the Neanderthal campsite.
(C) The flute was made from a cave-bear bone and the campsite at which the flute fragment was excavated was in a cave that also contained skeletal remains of cave bears.
(D) Flutes are the simplest wind instrument that can be constructed to allow playing a diatonic scale.
(E) The cave-bear leg bone used to make the Neanderthal flute would have been long enough to make a flute capable of playing a complete diatonic scale.
Good Musicologist might look at these five answer choices and think nothing is especially helpful to strengthen their argument. The presence of other instruments (A), older instruments (B), or simpler instruments (D); the presence of cave-bear skeletons (C); or the length of cave-bear legs (E) might not seem like great evidence to present at the annual Musicology-Anthropology convention. So let’s say the opposite of each statement were true and think about which piece of evidence Bad Musicologist would like most:
(A) Bone flutes weren’t the only musical instrument made by Neanderthals.
(B) Older musical instruments that used the diatonic scale have been discovered.
(C) The flute was made of something other than cave-bear bones.
(D) There are simpler instruments that can play the full diatonic scale.
(E) The cave-bear leg bone was too short to play a complete diatonic scale.
Most of these things are irrelevant to both sides of the issue. Answer choice (B) would even harm the Bad Musicologist’s argument by saying that there are other, older groups of people who used the diatonic scale. Only (E) would provide a point of contention- if the leg bone was too short to play a complete diatonic scale, this means that the bone flute would not be good evidence that the complete diatonic scale was developed by Neanderthals. If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then the opposite of evidence for my enemy is my evidence. Since the opposite of (E) would be helpful for Bad Musicologist, then (E) being true is helpful for Good Musicologist.
This reasoning also works in Weakening or Assumption type questions. If my job is to weaken the conclusion, then I want to find evidence that would strengthen the conclusion and then prove that this is not true.
Remember that an argument is a two-sided affair. Whenever you get stuck looking at one side of an argument, think about the other side. And whether you are defending Hotco Oil Burners, Country Z, or even yourself (from the accusation that it’s your turn to do the dishes), remember that there’s another way to look at the evidence. Your GMAT score will thank you for it, even if your significant other won’t. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2014-4-4 15:45:29
