lsat-3-1-17

n9a5x7

The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.” Yet we cannot just decide to define “intelligent life” in some more precise way since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.
17. The argument can most reasonably be interpreted as an objection to which one of the following claims?
(A) The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is one that will never be correctly answered.
(B) Whether or not there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, our understanding of intelligent life is limited.
(C) The question about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe must be made more precise if we hope to answer it correctly.
(D) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is so imprecise as to be meaningless.
(E) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is one we should not spend our time trying to answer.

Can anybody help me to translate the question of this problem?  " The argument can most reasonably be interpreted as an objection to which one of the following claims?"   I am confused with the word "objection".

我笨，我努力

我不是nn，我是一个这几天被逻辑所困的小丫头，呵呵

这是一个归纳题，题目说：这个argument是下面哪个选项的opppsion，就是以上的argument 削弱以下的那个选项。推理方式：由上至下

我选A。对吗？

lawyer_1

原文有两层意思：1。不可能将该问题（ whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe ）定义的精确。2。也不必要精确定义该问题。

问题：原文可以最合理的解释为反对下列哪个断言

答案C：如果我们希望正确回答该问题，就必须更精确定义该问题

原文说不但不可能，而且也没必要精确定义该问题，正好反驳C的断言

叮当

Agree with C.

n9a5x7

Thanks everybody. you're all working hard, look at that time.

sissi_woo

恩，选C。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-18 20:08:52编辑过]

我笨，我努力

呵呵，我也明白了