GWD20-Q38~有争议的一道题，求助NN~

evelyn205205

Journalist:Well-known businessman Arnold Bergeron has long been popular in the state, and he has often talked about running for governor, but he has never run.However, we have just learned that Bergeron has fulfilled the financial disclosure requirement for candidacy by submitting a detailed list of his current financial holdings to the election commission.So, it is very likely that Bergeron will be a candidate for governor this year.


The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in evaluating the journalist’s argument?

A.Has anybody else who has fulfilled the financial disclosure requirement for the upcoming election reported greater financial holdings than Bergeron?
B.Is submitting a list of holdings the only way to fulfill the election commission’s financial disclosure requirements?
C.Did the information recently obtained by the journalists come directly from the election commission?
D.Have Bergeron’s financial holdings increased in value in recent years?
E.Had Bergeron also fulfilled the financial disclosure requirements for candidacy before any previous gubernatorial elections?

此题的答案是E。
我认为是C，看过以前的一个讨论帖，更加相信C了。
如果对C的回答是no，不就不能得出他要参选么，如果连消息都是错误，哪里还会有后面的结论呢？
open to discussion~~~

evelyn205205

顶顶顶！

chasingM7

hmmm。 在我看来，只有E revelant。。。

conclusion：it is very likely that Bergeron will be a candidate for governor this year.

Premises: 1) 这个人想应聘州长，从来没当过原来。
        2）刚刚了解到说这个人把自己的财务情况报告给了选委会。

题目大概意思是说，因为上交了自己的财务情况，所以大有可能选举胜出。

evaluate question。。。。

题目是因为A，所以B。所以答案E，如果说这个人原来也上交过自己的财务情况，那么这个因果就不能成立。唯一能说明因果成立的，就是上交是第一次，可以对选举产生影响。

其他选项都无关。

evelyn205205

hmmm。 在我看来，只有E revelant。。。

conclusion：it is very likely that Bergeron will be a candidate for governor this year.

Premises: 1) 这个人想应聘州长，从来没当过原来。
        2）刚刚了解到说这个人把自己的财务情况报告给了选委会。

题目大概意思是说，因为上交了自己的财务情况，所以大有可能选举胜出。

evaluate question。。。。

题目是因为A，所以B。所以答案E，如果说这个人原来也上交过自己的财务情况，那么这个因果就不能成立。唯一能说明因果成立的，就是上交是第一次，可以对选举产生影响。

其他选项都无关。

-- by 会员 chasingM7 (2011/8/2 22:05:37)

对啊，你看你自己都说“刚刚了解到说这个人把自己的财务情况报告给了选委会”是个premise。那如果这个premise压根就不存在，而是一个错误的小道消息呢，不就削弱了结论么？
请指教~

chasingM7

题目给你的东西，那就是真的。自己别假设前提是假的。

evelyn205205

题目给你的东西，那就是真的。自己别假设前提是假的。

-- by 会员 chasingM7 (2011/8/2 22:22:00)

可是，为什么不能削弱前提呢，削弱了前提不就是削弱了结论嘛。
对D的回答是no，那么就削弱了前提了啊~

evelyn205205

顶！open to discussion~

evelyn205205

顶~

evelyn205205

up~

evelyn205205

upupup~