ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

The country of Baurisia has, until now, been self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, with growing prosperity in Baurisia has come a steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income in Baurisia is almost certain to rise further but increases in domestic grain production are highly unlikely, Baurisia is soon likely to become an importer of grain.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

正确答案: D

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 5680|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

这题怎么说呀??大家帮帮忙~

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-9-16 18:13:32 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
79.(32057-!-item-!-188;#058&006758)



The country of Baurisia has, until now, been self-sufficient in both grain and meat.However, with growing prosperity in Baurisia has come a steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat.Therefore, since per capita income in Baurisia is almost certain to rise further but increases in domestic grain production are highly unlikely, Baurisia is soon likely to become an importer of grain.



Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?



A. When people increase their consumption of meat, they also tend to increase their consumption of grain.

B. The per capita consumption of meat in Baurisia is roughly the same across all income levels.

C. Per capita consumption of meat has not increased substantially in recent years in those countries from which Baurisia is likely to import meat.

D. It is more economical for Baurisians to import meat than grain.

E. During Baurisia's years of growing prosperity, the country's population has remained relatively stable.


答案为D
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2010-9-16 18:21:56 | 只看该作者
argument 是由于对肉的需求变大,而生产肉需要grain,所以需要进口grain。d说直接进口肉成本反而更低,那需要进口grain的结论就被削弱了
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2010-9-16 19:06:58 | 只看该作者
请问,这个属于什么方法? “反对结论”吗?
地板
发表于 2013-5-14 20:39:26 | 只看该作者
richardyam15 发表于 2010-9-16 18:21
argument 是由于对肉的需求变大,而生产肉需要grain,所以需要进口grain。d说直接进口肉成本反而更低,那需 ...

看了众多解释 这个最靠谱
5#
发表于 2013-7-27 16:40:55 | 只看该作者
我的理解是:
原文:目前为止,g和m都是自给自足。但如今人均消耗m↑了(m不自给自足了),需要几磅的g来生产1磅的m(可以通过g转换m来满足↑的部分)。由于人均工资↑,而国内g总产量不↑,所以需要进口g。言下之意,m不自给自足了,要么进口要么通过g来转换。g本来是自给自足的,转换就达不到这一点了,所以要进口g。
D:进口m比进口g更实惠。m不足其实有2种解决方案,原文纠结于进口g再转成m而忘了直接进口m更经济。
6#
发表于 2014-11-24 21:07:28 | 只看该作者
感觉“since per capita income in Baurisia is almost certain to rise further but increases in domestic grain production are highly unlikely,"这句话很废很干扰啊。

原文说的就是肉和谷之前都自给自足,但是经济好了人们对肉的需求增多,而1肉=5谷(举例),又因为自己谷的产量不可能增加,所以就要进口谷来满足肉的需求。

削弱就是 题干走了弯路,与其进口谷转换成肉不如直接进口肉?

但是最后一个since那一部分,感觉好废,读起来迷迷糊糊的。

之前也错选了B。B说每个人对肉的需求和他们有钱没钱没关系。 但是题干给的是总体上对肉的需求增多。个体对这个有没关系不影响,因为总的肉需求是增多的。如果觉得和个体有影响那又算是改变了题干的条件?所以这个错
7#
发表于 2016-11-16 17:29:36 | 只看该作者
Satanilles 发表于 2014-11-24 21:07
感觉“since per capita income in Baurisia is almost certain to rise further but increases in domesti ...

你说的对呀,我也是觉得那个收入的项目放在那儿,不就是要选B嘛,而且那个国家能用grain生产肉的??

8#
发表于 2016-11-16 18:18:58 | 只看该作者
meiyw 发表于 2016-11-16 17:29
你说的对呀,我也是觉得那个收入的项目放在那儿,不就是要选B嘛,而且那个国家能用grain生产肉的??

...

我想题干中“with growing prosperity in Baurisia has come a steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat”描述的是从现在开始出现的状况。

“since per capita income in Baurisia is almost certain to rise further”这句话大概仅仅是为了进一步说明人们对meat的消费在未来应该还会稳定增长。

这样才得到了对未来状况的预测结论:“Baurisia is soon likely to become an importer of grain.”
9#
发表于 2016-11-16 18:54:10 | 只看该作者
这道题的结论是  收入升高但是G产量不变,所以要进口G  也就是对M需求增大,所以进口G      题目要求削弱结论,B说所有收入水平的人消费M的量一样,根本不能削弱结论,比如 量一样都非常大,对M的需求大,可能需要进口   或者量非常小,整体的需求虽然增加,但是也可能自给自足     重点是因果型结论,认为只有因能造成果,是唯一的因,有这样的因,必然造成这样的果。  D正好是攻击因果关系,提出同因异果,削弱选项。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-5 05:06
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部