以下是引用davidcopper在2004-12-10 10:01:00的发言：
唉, 题目的结论是simply seeing a credit-card logo makes many credit-card holders willing to spend more, 如果结论是使那些财务状况好的holders spend more就好理解了, 正好和B形成对比, 从反面进行原因加强.
我觉得是这道题有一点逻辑瑕疵，“经济条件好的持卡人看到logo会多付小费”跟“经济条件不好的持卡人看到logo会少付小费”根本没有关系，大家做到现在的逻辑，难道不知道这个是根本不能倒推的吗？ 经济条件不好的人也有可能会多付小费的
另外新东方的资料上也有这样类似一道题，我不知道是不是考试真题，也有这样的逻辑缺陷。
Six months or so after getting a video recorder, many early buyers apparently lost interest in obtaining videos to watch on it. The trade of business selling and renting videos is sitll buoyant, because the number of homes with video recorders is still growing. But clearly, once the maket for video recorders is saturated, business distributing videos face hard times. Which of the following if ture, would most seriously weaken the conculsion above? D)The early buyers of a novel product are always people who are quick to acquire novelties, but also often as quick to tire of them. 答案说早期的买者容易厌倦，暗示相对于后期购买者来说，后期购买者仍然比较忠诚，所以video business的市场仍然会存在。这个也有一点逻辑的瑕疵，因为早期的人容易厌倦不代表后期的就会忠诚，也有可能同样容易厌倦或者更厌倦。 如果说非要一个解释，我想只能从加强的作用上牵强附会了，因为加强只是加强事情成立的可能性，而不是必须使它成立。经济条件不好的人看到logo少给小费，至少说明了看到心理学家说得看到logo会对人给小费产生影响。
[此贴子已经被作者于2005-9-1 21:36:55编辑过] | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-5-14 22:45:00
