11.2 750(51+40)

dreamistrue

贴一个动物过敏逻辑题的解析。

Q: strengthen / explain the situation

Arg:
P1: people who spend time with animals often develop animal allergies
P2: zoo employees: 30% had animal allergies (assumption: those employees all had lots of animal contact... what about the people who work at the front gate selling tickets or in some office somewhere doing the marketing or accounting?)
P3: conclusion: in general population (not just zoo employees), ppl with lots of animal contact have animal allergies at a rate "substantially more" than 30%. [Note to self: substantially MORE? How can we assume it's HIGHER? Wouldn't the natural assumption be to assume it's about the same? That's kind of a leap there.]

Okay, so there's something missing that allows the conclusion to make this big leap to assuming the rate is "substantially more." If we knew what that piece of info was, it would make the conclusion somewhat more likely to be true. And that's what I'm trying to do with this question, so let's go find that piece of info.

A) Zoo employees who get animal allergies will stop being zoo employees. Okay, so they'd remove themselves from the "zoo employee" category... which means they wouldn't be part of that survey anymore. They're leaving this job BECAUSE the job requires animal contact. People who work in non-animal-related fields wouldn't need to quit their jobs. So, basically, this one's saying that zoo employees would underrepresent the % of people who have animal allergies, because that allergy would cause some people to leave that specific job.

B) pets at home doesn't address issue in arg. Eliminate.

C) This is probably true. But the argument already limits the "general population" group under discussion to the ones who have a similar level of exposure as zoo employees. The argument didn't try to conclude anything about ALL members of the general population. (And, if it did, then this choice would WEAKEN the argument, not strengthen it!) Eliminate.

D) domestic pets vs. zoo animals is not at issue in the arg. Eliminate.

E) protective gear not at issue. Eliminate.

dreamistrue

发现了逻辑题特别喜欢出的错误选项的陷阱：就是错误选项看着和题目有好多重合的关键词，好像意思上也确实起到了削弱和加强的作用，但是错误选项削弱or加强的是premise！！

此逻辑题答案是A，错误的选了C。注意C是一个陷进，因为C在讨论的是削弱了premise。而要看的是conclusion。文章中的premise已经说了，among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals，就表示这个是不可改变的事实，那么做题的时候就要承认条件，不可以改变这个条件，也不可以削弱或者加强这个条件。

cq168088

强大牛逼啊。

老张1119

沾喜气啊 恭喜楼主！

ly900829

顶上去~~~！

lxw1

喜气呀喜气。

meteorstar

求同分啊啊啊

athue

LZ,请确认摄影的那道，是说摄影是不是艺术，还是说17世纪绘画特别有摄影效果？which one?

嘻嘻娃娃

沾喜气~~~~三天后就考试啦

shane01

明天下午考 虽然无力回天不过还是得沾沾楼主的喜气！