【每日逻辑练习第二季】【1-11】

hanhan1991

1.weaken
1)time:46'/1''30
2)logical lines:
Background:lobsters are more likely to contract gill diseases in contaninated water.
Premise:Hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by the diseases.
Conclusion:The proposal of rerouted sewage is pointless.
3)Predication:
Though lobsters are hardly harmed by the disease , their offspring may hurt by it sine the sewage may affect their breeds.
4)Answer:E
.irrelevant,since we concern about how the reduce sewage affect lobsters.
B.irrelevant, since we only focus on lobsters near the harbor.
C.it can be a contender, but seems to be irrelevant.
D.irrelevant, how the disease are examing is out of scope.
E.correct. Though lobsters are hardly harmed by the disease, human can be hurt indrectly by it. Therefore, the proposal is meanful.

2.explain
1)time:39'/1''43'
ogical lines：
Fact:The number of cars owned by Germany and the total distance traveled by the cars both increased by 40 percent.
Paradox: The number of ressedents kill as car occupants increased by 300 percent.
3)Prediction:
More people killed in the car accident may because a car accommondate more people though the total number of car accident do not increase.
4)Answer:A
D.it seems very attractive.
****A) The average number of passengers per car was higher in the years before unification than it was in the two years after.----oppsite

3
time:44'/1''25'
ogical lines:
impose regulation on the pollutants->rise the cost of manufacture->rise the price of goods for export->diminishi the export market
3)Predication
There must be some factors that can cause the increase in the export levels.
4)Answer:A

4.explain
1)time:52'/1''57'
ogical lines:
the new process cost more than the old ones
the new process stands for the ariline's long-term ecomical intrest.
3)Predication:
There must be some factors that can prove that in the long-term the new process will save money.
4)Answer: B

5.weaken
1)time:39'/1''10'
ogical lines:
nonpatent life-sustaining drugs are at affordable price
to sheild patent-holding companies from it compatitor->produce patent drugs->high price
abolish patents of drugs->improve the access to new drugs
3)Prediction:
If patents are forbiden, the manufacturer may have no incentive to produce new drugs.
4)Answer

deniseya

1.
Time:48''

BG: lobster will be ill intaking sewage

P:sewage will not be in the harbor, the lobster lives short enough to be effected

by these diseases.

C:the proposal is meaningless.

Guess:the diseases will harm lobster eaters

Answer:E- see guess

2.
Time:28''

BG: germany united

P:east germany's car and driving distance increased 40%.

C:the people killed by car accidents increase300%

Guess:West germany drive wildly?

Answer-they drive less before.

3.
Time:44''

BG: strict policy on pollution

P:costy equipments---->price increase---->lost export market

C:export will drop

Guess:market wellcome green products more?or other cost may drop to mantain the

price unchange?

Answer:A-though the good's market shrink, new and blooming market of pollution

control eqquipement will expand the export.

4.
Time:39''

BG: old paint,2coats

P: 2layers of same paint.its expensive.

C:buying planes with new-tech paint is better.

Guess:the new painting method will bring other benefits.

Answer:B-the new painting method will increase the airlines' abillity.

5.
Time:34''

BG:

PS drugs now affordable unpatented, more expensive while patented as patent

shield it from competitors.

C:newly developed LS drugs will be accessed wilder if the patents are forbidden.

Guess:some reasons causing price still remain high.

Answer- if the price drop,the new drugs will not be developed.

每天总有几个单词要弄死朕：
sewage污水
unification合并，统一
Resultant price 复合总价


完成啦！

zxppx

6. Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are
more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage
contaminates their water. Under a recent proposal,
millions of gallons of local sewage each day would
be rerouted many kilometers offshore. Although this
would substantially reduce the amount of sewage in
the harbor where lobsters are caught, the proposal is
pointless, because hardly any lobsters live long
enough to be harmed by those diseases.

The important thing to solve the problem is to find out the reason given by the author why the proposal is pointless, since most lobsters cannot live long enough to be harmed by those diseases. But if they can be contaminated, the line of reasoning is fallacious. Or if human can be ill while eating these contaminated lobsters, the argument will be weakened. The purpose to prevent lobsters from contaminating to protect humans!
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously
weakens the argument?

(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage
are equally harmful to lobsters.

It seems to be a contender. But the argument talks about the gill disease caused by sewage.
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in
the open ocean than in industrial harbors.

Even though lobsters live longer in the open ocean than in industrial harbors, they may still be contaminated when they enter the industrial harbors.
(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewage contaminated
water as in unpolluted water.

If the choice is true, lobsters breeds in sewage contaminated water tend to be less contaminated. BA

My mistake is that I think once lobsters breed in sewage contaminated water, they will be contaminated. But no evidence supported by the argument has suggested the thought.
(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining
the surface of the lobster.

It is out of the scope of the argument.
(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating
lobsters with gill diseases.

It does mention a bad effect about contaminated lobsters, but the argument talks about whether the proposal can help reduce the contaminated lobsters, rather than the result of the contaminated lobsters.

I miss the meaning of the first sentence, which refers to humans. If human beings are likely to be ill without the proposal, then the argument should be weakened.



41. (32917-!-item-!-188;#058&006462)
In the two years following the unification of Germany in 1989, the number of cars owned by residents of East Germany and the total distance traveled by cars in East Germany both increased by about 40 percent. In those two years, however, the number of East German residents killed each year as car occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300 percent.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the disproportionate increase in traffic fatalities?

(A) The average number of passengers per car was higher in the years before unification than it was in the two years after.

Actually, this answer choice strengthens the contradiction.
(B) After unification, many people who had been living in East Germany relocated to West Germany.

It is out of the scope of the argument.
(C) After unification, a smaller proportion of the cars being purchased by East German residents were used vehicles.

Since used vehicles may account for more car accidents than new cars do, however, the fact that a smaller proportion of the cars were used vehicles makes the argument more contradictory.
(D) Drivers who had driven little or not at all before 1989 accounted for much of the increase in the total distance traveled by cars.

If more new drivers accounted for the increase in the total distance traveled by cars, there would be more car accidents. BA
(E) Over the same two-year period in East Germany, other road users, such as motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, experienced only small increases in traffic fatalities.

The same to A.



42. (33427-!-item-!-188;#058&006865)
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets. Clearly, therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument in the editorial?

A) The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.

At first glance, it seems like a contender, but after analyzing the followed answers, it should be the best answer. BA
(B) The proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.

Noncompliance is out of the scope of the argument.
(C) Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.

Actually, the answer choice strengthens the argument, rather than weakens.
(D) By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.

It is unrepresentative.
(E) The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.

It only can reveal that more corporations will compliance with the regulations.



43. (33475-!-item-!-188;#058&006874)
Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages: first, a coat of primer, and then a top coat. A new process requires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat. Using the new process instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraft considerably.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that it is in an airline's long-term economic interest to purchase new airliners painted using the new process rather than the old process?

(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.

Even though aircraft manufactures now offer the option of the new process, we cannot weigh the benefit between the old process and the new process.
(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity.

It accurately points out an weakness of the old process compared with the new process. BA
(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness.

Actually, it reveals a weakness of the new process.
(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed.

Spacecraft is out of the scope of the argument.
(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat.

It does not point out a virtue of the new process in contrast with the traditional process.



44. (33799-!-item-!-188;#058&007092)
In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors. These facts show that future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless a profitable enterprise.

It strengthens the contradiction that since life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, why their manufactures is a profitable enterprise. The most important thing is that the answer choice cannot weaken the argument, because these enterprises have not enough high profits to develop such drugs.
(B) Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.

It is out of the scope of the argument.
(C) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.

Actually, the choice in some degree strengthens the argument, rather than weakens.
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.

In this case, it really points out a weakness of the suggestion, thus making the line of reasoning less valid. BA
(E) Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.

It actually strengthens the argument.

CD用户825193

6. Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are
more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage
contaminates their water. Under a recent proposal,
millions of gallons of local sewage each day would
be rerouted many kilometers offshore. Although this
would substantially reduce the amount of sewage in
the harbor where lobsters are caught, the proposal is
pointless, because hardly any lobsters live long
enough to be harmed by those diseases.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously
weakens the argument?

52"...  (Weak)
P: Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by human can easily to cause diseases if they're contamited by sewage. A proposal suggests to rerout tons of sewage to offshores.
P: But lobsters and others never live long to be harmed by these deseases caused by the sewage.
C: The proposal is pointless.
Pre: Though the lobsters don't get the deseases, they r still harmful to human health.

Answers:(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage
are equally harmful to lobsters.
   irrelevant
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in
the open ocean than in industrial harbors.
   longer, but not maybe long enough to defeat the argument
(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewage contaminated
water as in unpolluted water.
   irrelevant
(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining
the surface of the lobster.
   CORRECT
[The point of the argument is not about weather it's easy to detect deseases on lobsters, but why the proposal is pointless...]
(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating
lobsters with gill diseases.
   not weaken
[This is the correct answer, as the argument doesn't even mention what the proposal mainly for... I though one step ahead of it...]


41. (32917-!-item-!-188;#058&006462)
In the two years following the unification of Germany in 1989, the number of cars owned by residents of East Germany and the total distance traveled by cars in East Germany both increased by about 40 percent.  In those two years, however, the number of East German residents killed each year as car occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300 percent.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the disproportionate increase in traffic fatalities?


49+24" (Reasoning)
P: In the following two years after the uflication of Germany, residents of east Germany who own cars and the long distance travelled cars in east Germany both incerased 40%
P: residents killed in car involved accidents increased 300%
Pre: reasoning: other reasons like bomb? caused the local ppl died, not by the cars themselves only?

Answers:
(A) The average number of passengers per car was higher in the years before unification than it was in the two years after.
   if it was higher, then the number of killed shall be lower
(B) After unification, many people who had been living in East Germany relocated to West Germany.
   might explain the increasing of local who have cars, but not the increasing 300% kills
(C) After unification, a smaller proportion of the cars being purchased by East German residents were used vehicles.
   like A, shall be not so many killed
(D) Drivers who had driven little or not at all before 1989 accounted for much of the increase in the total distance traveled by cars.
   not vr sound
(E) Over the same two-year period in East Germany, other road users, such as motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, experienced only small increases in traffic fatalities.
   other road users r not relevant


42. (33427-!-item-!-188;#058&006865)
Editorial:Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment.  It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations.  Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.  Clearly, therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument in the editorial?


45+29" (Weak / Support)
P: Government pollution constrain policy will cost manufacturers more on the production.
P: The goods prices will increase -> goods will be less competitive in the export market
C: -> there'll be dismished occur to the goods in the future
Pre: 1. even with the extra cost by the new policy the price of the goods will still be much lower than others
   2. the government will give subsidy to the manufacturers

Answers:
(A) The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.【even it's new products, the pollution control equipment still belongs to manufactured goods in Resimia...】    the argument is about the goods, not anything new will occur in the market
(B) The proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
   will not ease the extra cost to the manufacturers
(C) Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
   CORRECT
【didn't understand the meaning correctly... thought was the opposite.】
(D) By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.
   not relevant
(E) The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.
   irrelevant


43. (33475-!-item-!-188;#058&006874)
Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages:  first, a coat of primer, and then a top coat.  A new process requires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat.  Using the new process instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraft considerably.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that it is in an airline's long-term economic interest to purchase new airliners painted using the new process rather than the old process?


47" (Support)
P: Old way to paint: one layer first, then a coat layer; New: two coat layers together
Pre: advantages of the new way: less time consuming, less cost of maintenance, less mistakes...
C: New way is better

Answers:
(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.
   another option of new airliner doesn't explain " long-term economic interest"
(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity.
   kinda good part of the primer way
(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness.
   make sense...
【If a single layer of the new coating gives less protection, the old way shall be better】
(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed.
   the new way might be better at high temperature, but not necessarily more economical
(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat.
   nothing about the economic interest


44. (33799-!-item-!-188;#058&007092)
In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors.  These facts show that future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?


35" (Weak)
P: in countries where life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, the prices are widely affordable; while in the countries those drugs have to be patented, prices r much higher.
P: abolish patent everywhere to those drugs
C: more ppl can use them
Pre: no patent -> no research fee for further drugs... -> everyone dies....

Answers:
(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless a profitable enterprise.
   in this case, the patent shall be abolished.
(B) Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.
   irrelevant
(C) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.
   irrelevant
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
   CORRECT
(E) Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.
   Irrelevant

pennyz

2:59s
b
background:s contaminate water--->lob contract gill disease
proposal:s was wash away from harbour,and habour is cleaner
proposal:lobster  do not live long enough to te harmed by disease
rephrase:it can live that long?

pennyz

1:08
d
phenomenon1:car number and car distance increase by 40%
phenomenon 2:car accident increase 300%
explain:most increase was new driver
1:43
a
premise:reducion of pollution will cost a lot
      price will go up
conclusion:export will go down
rephrase:cost(not much) may not cause it to go dowm
2:03
d
premiseld has a prime layer
new no prime layer and has two new layer same weight as top layer
new one price up
conclusion is in the question stem!!!
48s
d

纽约我爱你

1~46s
Premise: 1.the oil is poured into the sea
2.the lobsters live shorter than the time they will be affected
Conclusion: we don’t need to worry about the harm to human
Weaken: the lobsters will contain chemicals bad to human
Answer: B 1’40’’
正解：E
因为人吃了得病的虾会生病，而这种虾在有油的地区很常见，所以油对人不好
B选项说公海的虾活得久，但是我们捕虾是在海湾，不是在公海，所以没影响
错的原因还是理解题意，明明自己预判都对了还选错，不能忍啊
哪位大神有妙招，求教……

2~39s
Premise: 1.the number of cars and the distance people travel increased by 40%
2.the number of people killed by traffic accidents increased by 300%
Explain: the traffic jam will make more accidents
Answer: D 2’04’’花的太久了……

3~1’12’’
Premise: the government will persuade the pollutant factories to control their pollution
2. it will make the export difficult
Conclusion: the export will decrease.
Weaken: consumers are more likely to buy eco-friendly goods
Answer: C 41’’
正解：A
妞儿，注意C说的是below！！！草草草，还是看错的问题！
一定要注意啊！

4~1’09’’
Premise: 1.a new process uses no prime but two layers with same thickness and weight as the traditional ones
2.the new process is much expensive than an old one
Conclusion: the new one has a long-term benefit
Support: the two layers will stay longer than the old ones
Answer: B 1’46’’

5~51s
Premise: non-patent drugs are cheaper than patent drugs
Conclusion: these drugs are more likely to access if the patent is abolished
Weaken: factories won’t continue to make these drugs
Answer: D 46’’

今天的题是不是比较基础啊？感觉好像比之前的简单些

Feelalive

到此一游~

Mint静默

1) 计时：34s
2) 逻辑链
Background Information:
Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten by humans are more likely to contract gill diseases when sewage contaminates their water.
Premise:
Under a recent proposal, millions of gallons of local sewage each day would be rerouted many kilometers offshore.
Conclusion:
The proposal is pointless, because hardly any lobsters live long enough to be harmed by those diseases.
3) 推测：
龙虾不会被那些disease影响，但是人吃了生病的龙虾对身体不好
4) 选项分析：
(A) Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage are equally harmful to lobsters. 无关
(B) Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in the open ocean than in industrial harbors. 无关
(C) Lobsters breed as readily in sewagecontaminated water as in unpolluted water.  无关
(D) Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining the surface of the lobster.  无关
(E) Humans often become ill as a result of eating lobsters with gill diseases.  Correct

1) 计时：15s
2) 逻辑链
Premise:
the number ofcars owned by residents of East Germany and the total distance traveled by carsin East Germany both increased by about 40 percent.
Conclusion X:
the number of EastGerman residents killed each year as car occupants in traffic accidentsincreased by about 300 percent.
3) 推测：
它因---人们开车越来越不专心 etc.

选A  错了，应该选D，看错题目了，before看成after。。。哭！

1) 计时：31s
2) 逻辑链
Background Information:
Regulations callfor unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers areallowed to discharge into the environment.
Premise:
It will takecostly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance tocomply with these regulations.  
Conclusion:
Resultant priceincreases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some exportmarkets.
3) 推测（weaken）：

该题潜在假设是price增加,export就会减少。推翻这个潜在假设，可以是customers are not price-sensitive或者其他国家也会实行类似regulations

选A

1) 计时：38s
2) 逻辑链
Background Information:
A new processrequires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developedcoating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness andweight as a traditional top coat.
Premise:
Using the newprocess instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraftconsiderably.
Conclusion X:
it is in an airline'slong-term economic interest to purchase new airliners painted using the newprocess rather than the old process
3) 推测：

Old process 的其他弊端

选B

1) 计时：37s
2) 逻辑链
Premise:
In countries inwhich new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold atwidely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premiumprices
Conclusion:
future access to newlife-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents onnewly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
3) 推测：
直接反对结论

选D

Elisha728

9'28'
CDABD'