LSAT-10-1-19，谢谢指教！

jacy · 发表于 2003-6-12 21:03:00

19。
A university should not be entitled to patent the inventions of its faculty members. Universities, as guarantors of intellectual freedom, should encourage the free flow of ideas and the general dissemination of knowledge. Yet a university that retains the right to patent the inventions of its faculty members has a motive to suppress information about a potentially valuable discovery until the patent for it has been secured. Clearly, suppressing information concerning such discoveries is incompatible with the university’s obligation to promote the free flow of ideas.

19. Which one of the following is an assumption that the argument makes?

(A) Universities are the only institutions that have an obligation to guarantee intellectual freedom.

(B) Most inventions by university faculty members would be profitable if patented.

(C) Publication of reports on research is the only practical way to disseminate information concerning new discoveries.

(D) Universities that have a motive to suppress information concerning discoveries by their faculty members will occasionally act on that motive.

(E) If the inventions of a university faculty member are not patented by that university, then they will be patented by the faculty member instead.

答案：D
不太明白，请大家帮忙。谢谢

joywzy · 发表于 2003-6-12 21:06:00

我选了C，答案是不是错了？哪位XDJM能讲讲此题？谢谢。

lyricling · 发表于 2003-6-12 23:00:00

本题的结论句在第一句，而不是clearly,后的sub-conlusion.
结论：学校不应拥有申请专利的权利。
证据：
（1）学校应该保证信息和知识的自由传播。
（2）但是拥有申请专利权的学校have motive 去压制关于这些专利发明的知识的传播。

Sub-conclusion:　“压制关于这些专利发明的知识的传播”　与（1）相矛盾 --->全文结论：学校不应拥有申请专利的权利。

这里，sub-conclusion中的“压制关于这些专利发明的知识的传播”　与（2）have motive去“压制关于这些专利发明的知识的传播”之间有一个gap.　有动机压制≠压制。

D选项在“有动机压制”与“压制”之间架桥，说明有压制的动机会导致压制。将D取非，有动机也不会压制，则原文的sub-conclusion就被weaken了,从最后的结论也不成立。

C项提到的puclication没有涉及到与本文逻辑推理相关的元素。　　

jacy · 发表于 2003-6-13 16:08:00

thank lyricling!
可是我认为d 的意思是: 由这个motive的学校很少会按照这个motive行动.
这样就正好反了.
是不是我对occasionally的理解有问题,
我把它理解为: 偶尔, 很少.
请问应该怎么理解?
谢谢!

lyricling · 发表于 2003-6-13 16:28:00

这里的occasionally,不应该理解为否定的意思，不管其频率如何，只要是说明motive将会导致压制，就是在这两个元素之间架桥了。
我是这样理解的，不知你是否同意？

jacy · 发表于 2003-6-13 16:41:00

同意, 谢谢!

mike1999 · 发表于 2003-6-13 16:48:00

选d,同意lyricling的观点。

joywzy · 发表于 2003-6-13 17:08:00

谢谢lyricling,讲得非常清楚.

体会如下:

做题中,要分清论点论据,要在各选项中找与论证相关的元素.

道理应是如此,这需要依赖阅读能力.

LSAT-10-1-19，谢谢指教！