LSAT-1-4-18\LSAT-1-4-20

flywood

If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all the arts of life? To dig, to plow, to build, to wear clothes—all are direct violations of the injunction to follow nature.

18. If the author’s argument were challenged on the grounds that the construction of buildings has adverse effects on the natural environment, which of the following replies might the author use to respond to the challenge logically?

(A) There are human activities, such as making music, that are environmentally harmless.

(B) Harming the environment is not an end, of purpose, of the arts of life.

(C) The construction could involve the use of natural, not artificial, materials.

(D) Constructing buildings is not an “art of life.”

(E) Even if the natural environment is disturbed by the construction of buildings, it is improved for human use.

唉,D怎么不行,说建筑不是艺术,不在他的讨论范围,多干脆啊,又不行,气死了.还是因为原文中有了TO BUILD,所以答案不能是D.

20. Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.

(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.

(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.

(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.

(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

我选了E,现在知道E不对,但是C怎么推出的不知道,求教!

lawyer_1

18。文中作者观点是：人造的东西是好的。有人反驳说建筑不好，因为对环境不好。作者对这个反驳应该针对建筑的好处去反驳，至于它是不是ARTS OF LIFE无关，因为ARTS OF LIFE也只是作者支持他观点的一个例子。

20。如果Public employees 是real taxpayers，那原文两句话就得出矛盾的结果。ABOLISH税收时，根据第一句话，税后收入增加，根据第二句话却消失。没税情况不知道，故E错

flywood

明白了,谢谢.

ymxl4611

我当时没选对,是觉得(C)选项是命题成立的假设,而不是可以推出的结论,请问,这样想问题在那里?

Bensontuo

flywood 发表于 2004-8-6 03:57
If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all the arts of life? To dig, to p ...

Spot the question type - Weaken

Core of the argument:

To dig, to plow, to build, to wear clothes are all arts of life, and he believes that if they are not direct violate the injunction to follow nature, then artificial must be better than natural.

Now, the argument was challenged by " Construction of buildings has adverse effects on the natural environment. " Ok, regardless of the fact that whether the adverse effects could be caused or not, we know that building must be artificial, and it must be better than nature by not involving direct violations of the injunction to follow nature.

So, to respond the challenge logically, you want to aim the answer around 2 points.

1. Adverse effects on the natural environment does not mean the fact that violate the injunction to follow nature.

2. the arts of life will be improved by having the building.

E as correct answer.

Bensontuo

flywood 发表于 2004-8-6 03:57
If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all the arts of life? To dig, to p ...

20.

No tax, then real taxpayers have their disposable incomes higher

No tax, then public employees have their income disappeared.

( The increased part of the disposable incomes of real taxpayers serves as the income decreased of the public employees )

We are looking for must be true answer.

A. its totally non relevant

B. If dont pay taxes, the only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend ( we dont really need this to be necessary true, since how could you defined " only " here  )

C. Apparently, this is must be true answer.

D. 1. Yes, they might come from taxes, but who to say that their incomes should not be taxed ?

E. Ok, so here is the thing. Do we really know the fact that whether real taxpayers could also be " Public employees " ? Apparently, its the conclusion that we have to figure out first to determine if E must be true or could be true.