ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3439|回复: 7
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD-TN-6 Q3 求指点!一道貌似削弱功能很弱的削弱题!!

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-9-3 22:44:25 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
In the late 1980’s, the population of sea otters in the North Pacific Ocean
began to decline. Of the two plausible explanations for the decline—increased predation by killer whales or disease—disease is the more likely. After all, a concurrent sharp decline in the populations of seals and sea lions was almost certainly caused by a pollution-related disease, which could have spread to sea otters, whereas the population of killer whales did not change noticeably.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the reasoning?A.Killer whales in the North Pacific usually prey on seals and sea lions but will, when this food source is scarce, seek out other prey.

B.There is no indication that substantial numbers of sea otters migrated to other locations from the North Pacific in the 1980’s.

C.Along the Pacific coast of North America in the 1980’s, sea otters were absent from many locations where they had been relatively common in former times.

D.Following the decline in the population of the sea otters, there was an increase in the population of sea urchins, which are sea otters’ main food source.

E.The North Pacific populations of seals and sea lions cover a wider geographic area than does the population of sea otters
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-3 22:48:58 | 只看该作者
题目是:结论:otter两个数量下降原因:disease和incresed predation,disease更可能
条件:1,decline in the populations of seals and sea lions 由disease引起,这种病友可能传给sea otter
         2, killer whale数量没有上升(这里暗含假设是,whale捕食量上升)
A,提出weaken了其中暗含的假设,提出了另外一种解释   decline in the populations of seals and sea lions导致了killer whale食物少了,所以更多的吃otter咯
-- by 会员 will_kk (2007/5/25 0:54:00)






LS不觉得A选项是对条件2 (kiler whale 数量没有上升 暗含的whale捕食量上升的假设)的具体的解释吗?
正式因为whale去吃otter去了,所以数量没有下降啊。这不就是对reasoning的具体解释吗?并没有起到削弱作用啊?
如果要说此题有削弱作用 应该是对disease这种可能性的否定。。
我认为该题的削弱性不是很强啊~~
不过利用排除法也只有A还稍稍削弱了一点。。
有没有更好的解释啊!!!很困惑!!
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-3 23:11:19 | 只看该作者
顶顶顶啊!!!
地板
发表于 2011-9-3 23:16:20 | 只看该作者
削弱性还可以吧。因为你的目标是告诉他otter下降的原因中,incresed predation更有可能。(如果不是生病,只能是被吃了,非此即彼)
条件12,是真实发生的。
A选项先利用条件2,说lion他们都坏了,killer只能吃其他东西了。再利用条件1,因为killer数量没变,说明他们都去吃otter了,迎合了otter下降的事实。
5#
发表于 2011-9-3 23:16:37 | 只看该作者
呃~CR~好吧,CR我承认我还不够强。。。不过,我米有肿么看懂那个楼上写的暗含假设,我觉得没有必要那么深入吧。

首先,是个因果性结论,而且一定要抓住结论,结论到底要说什么。
结论:The decrease in caused by disease not by killer whale.  
削弱它,最最直接的方法,就是去证明The decrease is caused by killer whales.

那很明显,A说的就是这个意思啊...
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-4 08:21:01 | 只看该作者
呃~CR~好吧,CR我承认我还不够强。。。不过,我米有肿么看懂那个楼上写的暗含假设,我觉得没有必要那么深入吧。

首先,是个因果性结论,而且一定要抓住结论,结论到底要说什么。
结论:The decrease in caused by disease not by killer whale.  
削弱它,最最直接的方法,就是去证明The decrease is caused by killer whales.

那很明显,A说的就是这个意思啊...
-- by 会员 superbat28 (2011/9/3 23:16:37)



after all 后面接得是结论whereas the population of killer whales did not change noticeably.
同在结论句中,我认为它也是结论的一部分啊。纠结于此!
7#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-4 08:23:51 | 只看该作者
削弱性还可以吧。因为你的目标是告诉他otter下降的原因中,incresed predation更有可能。(如果不是生病,只能是被吃了,非此即彼)
条件12,是真实发生的。
A选项先利用条件2,说lion他们都坏了,killer只能吃其他东西了。再利用条件1,因为killer数量没变,说明他们都去吃otter了,迎合了otter下降的事实。
-- by 会员 自由风暴 (2011/9/3 23:16:20)


啊,明白了~
8#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-4 08:24:41 | 只看该作者
呃~CR~好吧,CR我承认我还不够强。。。不过,我米有肿么看懂那个楼上写的暗含假设,我觉得没有必要那么深入吧。

首先,是个因果性结论,而且一定要抓住结论,结论到底要说什么。
结论:The decrease in caused by disease not by killer whale.  
削弱它,最最直接的方法,就是去证明The decrease is caused by killer whales.

那很明显,A说的就是这个意思啊...
-- by 会员 superbat28 (2011/9/3 23:16:37)




after all 后面接得是结论whereas the population of killer whales did not change noticeably.
同在结论句中,我认为它也是结论的一部分啊。纠结于此!
-- by 会员 坨坨元 (2011/9/4 8:21:01)


不纠结了,是我自己想的太多了。思路不清晰。。
谢谢BAT !
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, 2025-10-7 21:02
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部