gwd-11-12

rhod

C.

C的意思是cooking是准备吃东西之前的一个通常的步骤, 而irraidiation只是为了把食物保存的时间长一些, 两者的目的和用途都不一样, 所以misleading.

dream1111

C,

1. consider it from the misleading.  what the proponents are misleading by ' Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking' ? They are trying to compare this two processes at same level in terms of necessarity, that is , two independent processes. But, in fact, they are not as C presents.

2. By ' either '  and 'or'.   According to argument, all cooking food should follow 'or',  as compared with all raw food following ' either'. But E is concerning to only food both cook and irradiation.

cocojumbo

以下是引用coolgirl在2004-6-23 7:54:00的发言：

Q12:

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage.  However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods.  For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain.  roponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.  However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

1. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life


2. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has


3. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods


4. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is


5. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

没有标准答案，我选C,有人选E,可我搞不懂，谁来帮帮我？

okay, folks, this is my first post.

my understanding: the question asked for the most logical to complete the argument. we emphasize ''complete''. the first half of the argument pointed out that the proponents proposal doesnot apply for the raw food; and the second half of the argument completed by choosing E, either language wise or logic wise, by pointing out that the propoents proposal does not apply for the cooked food either.

so, answer is E. my two cents, suggestions and comments are more than welcome!

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-5 10:43:09编辑过]

shuoshuqi

我认为最关键的问题就是misleading
如果如C所说 cooking和 irradiation 不是一个过程

那么讨论这个本身就是misleading, 那么第一个论点"beside the point"也根本不用提，因为只要讨论这两个不同TYPE 的东西，本身就是 misleading
我认为作者的观点的前提都是特指需要irradiated 的food
1.不需要cooking的irradiated food ——beside the point
2.  需要cooking的irradiated food ----misleading(因为whether cooking is worse than irradiation,两者综合的效果更严重）

所以我同意 E

exan

I support E.

原来我也选了C，但是现在觉得E才是正确的。

最重要明白misleading的含义

首先根据either...or...的关系，misleading是within the point---destory B，所以irradiation和cooking的不同用途（C）是beside the point.

所以misleading可以理解为两个层面的意思

1. 单独考查irradiation和cooking ，其实irradiation  比 cooking 损失小，所以misleading

从这个层面来看，C和E都没有解释。其实最合适的解释应该是irradiation of uncooked food 与 cooking of nonirradiation food比较，看究竟哪个损失小。所以原文并不是指这个层面的意思。

2. “单独考查irradiation和cooking”这种思维是misleading，不管irradiation比cooking损失的多还是少，把二者割裂开来本身就是一种misleading。

从这个层面来看，C说cooking是最后一步，但并没有说food究竟有没有irradiate过；但是E明确的说irradiate+cook，损失是compound，即irradiation 损失+ cooking损失。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-9 7:52:34编辑过]

ztlbox

同意e

很简单，c说了一个常识，炒菜和保存食品，是大象和种植园的关系，有什么好误会的？

c. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods

e为什么正确，大，小，菜，肉牛们已论证得很充分了

yunchai

偶.偶.先开始觉得c 对, 后来又觉得e对.

nn们,for food that is both irradiated and cooked,that 在这里不是修饰得是food 吗, 说事物同时具有两种情况.可是文章中指是讨论了事物的一种情况, irradiated or cooked.

偶能在这里看成是无关选项吗?

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-9 19:03:22编辑过]

yunchai

我又看了一边, 发现e是对的.

e是在支持irradiation and cooking 在损失b1上是一样的.

blur

Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.  

这句话是把irradiation和cooking分开，进行比较而已，E选项则把这两个process 综合在一起，个人感觉是无关选项。

支持C

cranberry

还是支持c。

什么是misleading?误导应该是不正确地使用某些事实，而绝对不是事实本身不正确。如c所说，如果某些食物的最终是要通过煮熟来吃的，那么即使煮熟的过程和微波防腐对某些营养成分的损害是一样的，那么也不能因此就支持选择微波，因为在这个范畴底下，食物的煮熟是不可避免的，因此这个损失也是不可选择的，而微波则并非一定要采用的方式，所以以此为由，是误导了大家。而e，且不说其限定了讨论的范畴，就其所说微波和烹饪造成的损失是复合的，那么其含义是说微波也造成了损失，但不能削弱微波造成的损失。微波支持者的意思是既然人们都用同样有害的烹饪，为什么不能使用可能害处不那么大的微波呢？要说明它的误导，c是最清晰的。