大全-D-11

zxppx

注意问题“best refute”
11.Gloria: Those who advocate tuition tax credits for parents whose children attend private schools maintain that people making no use of a government service should not be forced to pay for it. Yet those who choose to buy bottled water rather than drink water from the local supply are not therefore exempt from paying taxes to maintain the local water supply.
Roger: Your argument is illogical. Children are required by law to attend school. Since school attendance is a matter not of choice, but of legal requirement, it is unfair for the government to force some parents to pay for it twice.
R认为G推理的错误在于：教育是法律规定的，必须要做的（但是买水是可以选择的）

Which of the following responses by Gloria would best refute Roger’s charge that her argument is illogical?
目的是要反驳R的观点（认为G的不合理），而R正好引用了法律的强制性。那么G可以同样利用喝水是必须的来反驳R。但我没弄懂G引用两个例子之间的关系。不过这里不是考点。我做错了就在于把这个地方理解错了！

(A)Although drinking water is not required by law, it is necessary for all people, and therefore my analogy is appropriate.
上学是必须的，但是可以选择公立和私立学校；喝水是必须的，但是可以选择瓶装水和当地的水。所以这个类比是合理的

(B) Those who can afford the tuition at a high-priced private school can well bear the same tax burden as those whose children attend public schools.
能承受并不表明就应该承受

(C) If tuition tax credits are granted, the tax burden on parents who choose public schools will rise to an intolerable level.
(D) The law does not say that parents must send their children to private schools, only that the children must attend some kind of school, whether public or private.
这个选项很有迷惑性，但是“法律没有说……”和A选项相比，A选项指出了通过R采用的推理“法律规定……”来推出G推理的合理性，从而和R认为G不合理相违背，从而削弱R的观点（使用R的论据来支持G的观点）（A）

(E) Both bottled water and private schools are luxury items, and it is unfair that some citizens should be able to afford them while others cannot.
这和“能不能够”无关